Not many teachers get credit for working above and beyond thier duties.

[zsdersw]

They are not the perfect solution, but they are one of the few things protecting teachers from the bullshit politics that go on in government agencies. Removal of the teachers unions CANNOT be demanded in isolation of policies and protections being SIMULTANEOUSLY implemented to protect our educators, and more importantly our children, from being shanked because a supervisor (who was caught with a 16yo in the back of their car... I am not lying) does not like some of the teachers that work under him getting more state awards than he does and that give him no credit (undeserved) for it.

Everyone needs to be more accountable, and everyone is accountable to someone.

There are very few unions that abuse their positions, but elimination thereof would only swing the abuse back to where it was when the unions were originally formed to protect against.

Elimination is a political battle cry. It is not a solution.

Wrong. It is definitely a solution. What Walker did in my state has helped immensely. The teachers who were, before, highly resistant to the technology and curriculum reforms we're trying to make are now either retiring or getting on-board. I wish Walker would've extended his union reforms to police/firefighter unions too, but that's another story.

 

[Ninjahedge]

Everyone needs to be more accountable, and everyone is accountable to someone.

Trust me. Teachers can be "held accountable" in ways other than simply firing. Try sitting in on detention sometime, or an 8th grade "physical science" class with kids who almost have to be tied down to stay put.

It can, and has been used to get teachers to run, even with tenure.

And, the irony is, tenure works both ways. there are many teachers who do NOT LEAVE the schools they are at because they would give up their tenure.

Take a look at the rate of job switching in Teaching (past the first 3 years) as compared to any other profession. there are VERY FEW, if any, that come close.

Wrong. It is definitely a solution. What Walker did in my state has helped immensely. The teachers who were, before, highly resistant to the technology and curriculum reforms we're trying to make are now either retiring or getting on-board. I wish Walker would've extended his union reforms to police/firefighter unions too, but that's another story.

It is not a solution. Again, your tech example is NOT a validation of elimination of Unions. I also fail to see how elimination of unions MAKES people want to retire.... Somehow that seems rather shady.

You put a scorpion in someones shorts and you can get them to dance. It does not mean that it will do anyone else any good.

 

[zsdersw]

Trust me. Teachers can be "held accountable" in ways other than simply firing. Try sitting in on detention sometime, or an 8th grade "physical science" class with kids who almost have to be tied down to stay put.

It can, and has been used to get teachers to run, even with tenure.

And, the irony is, tenure works both ways. there are many teachers who do NOT LEAVE the schools they are at because they would give up their tenure.

Take a look at the rate of job switching in Teaching (past the first 3 years) as compared to any other profession. there are VERY FEW, if any, that come close.

Oh yes... I'm well aware of the punishment of moving teachers to the middle school level as punishment. It's a very tough age group to deal with; harder than elementary or high, IMO.

The problem with tenure is it's always the bad teachers who cling to it. Everyone else makes themselves valuable and needed in other ways like, oh I don't know, being better teachers.

It is not a solution. Again, your tech example is NOT a validation of elimination of Unions. I also fail to see how elimination of unions MAKES people want to retire.... Somehow that seems rather shady.

Yes it is. The people in my district who are retiring in the face of not being able to hide behind the union shield anymore are close enough to retirement to go for it. If the union remained as it was, they'd sit in their positions, rotting, for 5 or maybe even 10 more years; refusing to make changes that will benefit students' education.

You put a scorpion in someones shorts and you can get them to dance. It does not mean that it will do anyone else any good.

If you're trying to get them to dance when that's what they're being paid for, yes, it does a lot of good.

 

[Baptismbyfire]

That is the only key and relevant factor.


Principals are under the supervision of the superintendent, and the superintendent is under the supervision of the school board. Everyone is held accountable by someone.


I don't think independence from political/ideological influence is something the unions play any role in.

I don't see why you don't think the selective process is an important factor. You don't think accepting only talented, hard-working, and highly motivated students has much impact on results? Just the fact that the students will be of similar abilities makes teaching much easier.

Also, as you said principals may already be monitored by superintendents and school board members, but I think monitoring on different levels by multiple parties is important. The teachers can see what the school board members cannot see, and vice versa. Of course, we can't assume that either the superintendent or school board members are free from politics, and that they always act in the best interest of students (either deliberately or purely out of human limitations).

And I'm not trying to say that the union is free from politics because that would be quite a ridiculous thing to say, but the union does create a series of "hurdles" that make it difficult to fire a teacher. Unless unions specifically state that its members cannot teach creationism or speak out against small government, and etc, I don't believe that they can exert the same kind of pressure on what to say and what not to say in classroom as principals or parents can. Correct me if I'm wrong on this matter.

 

[zsdersw]

I don't see why you don't think the selective process is an important factor. You don't think accepting only talented, hard-working, and highly motivated students has much impact on results? Just the fact that the students will be of similar abilities makes teaching much easier.

It's a factor, but it's far from the most significant one. I've seen plenty of good and bad public schools; they all have to admit any student.

And I'm not trying to say that the union is free from politics because that would be quite a ridiculous thing to say, but the union does create a series of "hurdles" that make it difficult to fire a teacher. Unless unions specifically state that its members cannot teach creationism or speak out against small government, and etc, I don't believe that they can exert the same kind of pressure on what to say and what not to say in classroom as principals or parents can. Correct me if I'm wrong on this matter.

Neither unions, nor principals, nor parents can do what you suggest.

 

[Ninjahedge]

If you're trying to get them to dance when that's what they're being paid for, yes, it does a lot of good.

Analogy extended:

The dance sucks. Even for a white boy.

It would make Elaine look smooth.

 

[Exterous]

It's not about a list of powers, it's about how effective those powers are in the presence of unions.

And you can provide proof of wide spread, generalized ineffectiveness of their power because of unions?

Technology implementation, for example, is a huge problem in my district. We buy the technology teachers want and that I think are of an educational benefit. We train the teachers on how to use it effectively. And yet, in many classrooms, the teachers aren't adapting their teaching to incorporate these technologies. Their excuse? "I wasn't given enough training" or "I don't think technology fits into the subject I teach". Bullshit.. they're just too goddamn lazy and set in their ways.

Ok....and where does the principals leadership fit into this? I am also curious to know why you think introducing new technology to teachers would be different from introducing new technology to any other group of employees? Trust me - "I wasn't given enough training" or "I don't think technology fits" are issues you ALWAYS issues you will have to deal with in IT. And just saying 'Well, without unions' doesn't get you out if it because often these people who make these compaints in the private industry won't be removed either. The last three places I worked IT always had to be a CYA department because people will constantly try to get out of new technology with those (and other) excuses and were too goddamn lazy and set in their ways. I have never seen anyone let go over it and I have never worked at a place with a union

 

[zsdersw]

And you can provide proof of wide spread, generalized ineffectiveness of their power because of unions?

Off the top of my head I have my own anecdotal experience. Every district I've worked for has shown this.

Can you provide anything beyond your own anecdotal experience?

Ok....and where does the principals leadership fit into this? I am also curious to know why you think introducing new technology to teachers would be different from introducing new technology to any other group of employees? Trust me - "I wasn't given enough training" or "I don't think technology fits" are issues you ALWAYS issues you will have to deal with in IT. And just saying 'Well, without unions' doesn't get you out if it because often these people who make these compaints in the private industry won't be removed either. The last three places I worked IT always had to be a CYA department because people will constantly try to get out of new technology with those (and other) excuses and were too goddamn lazy and set in their ways. I have never seen anyone let go over it and I have never worked at a place with a union

Not in this job market.

 

[zsdersw]

Analogy extended:

The dance sucks. Even for a white boy.

It would make Elaine look smooth.

They refuse to learn how to dance.

 

[Ninjahedge]

It's a factor, but it's far from the most significant one. I've seen plenty of good and bad public schools; they all have to admit any student.

The better ones I have been to are significantly different.


Lets put it this way, when the school you go to has half of the seniors getting BMW's when they are old enough to drive AND their parents are willing to pay the $$ for tutoring (my job during the school year), you tend to get better test scores than t a non-focus city school.

 

[Ninjahedge]

They refuse to learn how to dance.

We aren't talking ants-in-the-pants here Mr!!!!!!

 

[Exterous]

Off the top of my head I have my own anecdotal experience. Every district I've worked for has shown this.

Can you provide anything beyond your own anecdotal experience?

Sorry - I was under the impression that someone making a claim would be able to back it up with proof 😀

Not in this job market.

Since apparently we are dispensing with the need to provide actual proof of our claims and instead relying on anechdotal evidence only I would point out that having working in the most economically depressed area of the state with the highest unemployment in the nation that I never once saw anyone removed from a job for being too damn lazy and set in their ways to adjust to new technology

 

[zsdersw]

Sorry - I was under the impression that someone making a claim would be able to back it up with proof 😀

You started in this thread with anecdotes.. which sets the bar.

Since apparently we are dispensing with the need to provide actual proof of our claims and instead relying on anechdotal evidence only I would point out that having working in the most economically depressed area of the state with the highest unemployment in the nation that I never once saw anyone removed from a job for being too damn lazy and set in their ways to adjust to new technology

I have. I used to work in IT for a nation-wide company in their tech support call center, providing IT support for the company's employees. I can count three people I saw removed because they were being lazy and refused to adapt their tech support methods to fit company demands.

 

[radhak]

anybody that makes a career out of teaching is in a rut or has no employable job skills in the real job market.

You displayed your ignorance there. You not getting the full benefit of somebody's teachings are not their fault.

 

[zsdersw]

The better ones I have been to are significantly different.


Lets put it this way, when the school you go to has half of the seniors getting BMW's when they are old enough to drive AND their parents are willing to pay the $$ for tutoring (my job during the school year), you tend to get better test scores than t a non-focus city school.

Yes, and I've seen and worked for districts where the most expensive student vehicle is a Chevy Cavalier and the test scores were very high too; higher than some districts in higher-class areas.

I've also worked for a district where the students had BMWs, the parents had money to spend on tutoring (but didn't), and the test scores were very high too.

 

[Exterous]

You started in this thread with anecdotes.. which sets the bar.

What? Several posters used anechdotes before I did!

I have. I used to work in IT for a nation-wide company in their tech support call center, providing IT support for the company's employees. I can count three people I saw removed because they were being lazy and refused to adapt their tech support methods to fit company demands.

Yes but did you work in the most economically depressed area of the state with the highest unemployment? If not then my appeal to authority is better than yours!

 

[Pulsar]

There is nothing 'special' about teachers. Or rather, nothing any more special about teachers than anyone else.

People talking about how most teachers are in the job for 'the love of teaching' or 'for love of the kids' are romanticizing what is just another career path.

If you were to research it, I'm certain you'd find the same percentages of teachers are in their jobs for the same reason that most of the other people are in their own. Varied reasons, some possibly even including enjoyment of teaching and kids, but mostly because it was what they found they could handle without a lot of stress, what came easily, or because they simply liked the amount of vacation they got.

There are very few people growing up who say "my life's ambition is to be a teacher". Think about it.

I say this having had a lot of experience dealing with teachers. I've been in the repeated position of trying to organize educational extra-curricular activities with schools. In many situations the teachers turn it down because, and I QUOTE: "There isn't an additional pay stipend". They do their work for pay, and without it they really aren't interested in going the extra mile. Just like everyone else.

 

[Ninjahedge]

Yes, and I've seen and worked for districts where the most expensive student vehicle is a Chevy Cavalier and the test scores were very high too; higher than some districts in higher-class areas.

I've also worked for a district where the students had BMWs, the parents had money to spend on tutoring (but didn't), and the test scores were very high too.

Exceptions =/= the rule.

Generally speaking, the combination of parents AND schooling make the difference.

In many areas in NJ, the budgets were so skewed that teachers had to buy their own supplies (chalk and tissues!0 in the better districts because the funding was being dumped into poorer districts (Newark) in an attempt to "fix" things by providing unwed mothers the opportunity to learn MS Word on their brand new computers.

Back to OT, the elimination of Unions will NOT help things unless it is coupled with policy change, which will not happen with no unions. See the egg problem here?


As for people being "lazy", try this smart boy. Go up and learn something completely new. You and I grew up with this. I was tweaking my analog VCR to unscramble HBO when I was 12. I imagine you have similar experiences.

Most technology does not phase us (although networking is driving me buggy right now in setting up a bridge point...). But we could not teach my grandmother TO HOLD A MOUSE! After HOURS of trying, we gave up. That was not lazy. The woman would clean house as an 80yo and bake cookies.

MOST people feel really uncomfortable with something they are not familiar with. Disrupting the status quo. Possibly venturing into something they will not do well. YOU try doing Modern Physics. Think you know Physics well enough? Well, as a kid that nailed the AP with one hand tied behind his back and nearly the same on the Achievement score (being one of the highest in the state, BTW), Modern physics blew my mind.

These people could be similar. I have had similar problems trying to get ENGINEERS to use SPREADSHEETS for TABULAR CALCULATIONS (moment of inertia!!!). You will NOT get many professions more technically involved than engineering, and they were still unwilling, in a PRIVATE COMPANY WITH NO TENURES OR UNION PROTECTION to go further with technology.

So, while I do respect you and your opinions here, I think there is a bit of a gap in your understanding of this issue. I am not faulting you for it, but it just seems like you refuse to acknowledge any problem with the system that could be rectified WITHOUT setting unions up as the sacred cow.

 

[Ninjahedge]

If you were to research it, I'm certain you'd find the same percentages of teachers are in their jobs for the same reason that most of the other people are in their own. Varied reasons, some possibly even including enjoyment of teaching and kids, but mostly because it was what they found they could handle without a lot of stress, what came easily, or because they simply liked the amount of vacation they got.

man, you have not lived with a teacher and their friends, have you.

There are very few people growing up who say "my life's ambition is to be a teacher". Think about it.

Actually, there are. But the only ones that are allowed to do that, in today's society, w/o being looked down on are young women talking about the 2nd grade.

I have heard nobody go "OMG you want to be a French teacher? that is so great!!!" so nobody TELLS people they are going to be something they will be ridiculed for unless you ask them.

I say this having had a lot of experience dealing with teachers. Trying to organization education extra-curricular activities with the school, and having every one of the teachers turn it down because, and I QUOTE: "There isn't an additional pay stipend" leaves me feeling that really that aren't different than any other person. They do their work for pay, and without it they really aren't interested.

Um, could it be they have lives? Somehow judging whether or not a teacher likes teaching based on whether or not they host, gratis, a bake sale is not exactly the best credentia I can think of......

 

[zsdersw]

What? Several posters used anechdotes before I did!

You didn't add anything beyond anecdotes, either.

Yes but did you work in the most economically depressed area of the state with the highest unemployment? If not then my appeal to authority is better than yours!

I don't know what you'd call Milwaukee WI... this was happening in 2008-09.

 

[zsdersw]

Exceptions =/= the rule.

Generally speaking, the combination of parents AND schooling make the difference.

That is true.

Back to OT, the elimination of Unions will NOT help things unless it is coupled with policy change, which will not happen with no unions. See the egg problem here?

I see an effectiveness problem. Unions haven't been effective on the policy front, have they? No, instead they've done nothing but ask for more and more pay and driven many states and school districts to make major cuts. I've seen extra-curricular programs, art, music, foreign language programs, and transportation cut in districts simply because the unions wouldn't accept a pay freeze. That kind of bullshit has to stop.

As for people being "lazy", try this smart boy. Go up and learn something completely new. You and I grew up with this. I was tweaking my analog VCR to unscramble HBO when I was 12. I imagine you have similar experiences.

Been there, done that. I was never good at doing over-the-phone tech support (as opposed to in-person), working with e-Rate, or writing a district-wide technology plan. I became good at all of those things.

Most technology does not phase us (although networking is driving me buggy right now in setting up a bridge point...). But we could not teach my grandmother TO HOLD A MOUSE! After HOURS of trying, we gave up. That was not lazy. The woman would clean house as an 80yo and bake cookies.

MOST people feel really uncomfortable with something they are not familiar with. Disrupting the status quo. Possibly venturing into something they will not do well. YOU try doing Modern Physics. Think you know Physics well enough? Well, as a kid that nailed the AP with one hand tied behind his back and nearly the same on the Achievement score (being one of the highest in the state, BTW), Modern physics blew my mind.

These people could be similar. I have had similar problems trying to get ENGINEERS to use SPREADSHEETS for TABULAR CALCULATIONS (moment of inertia!!!). You will NOT get many professions more technically involved than engineering, and they were still unwilling, in a PRIVATE COMPANY WITH NO TENURES OR UNION PROTECTION to go further with technology.

By all means, feel free to go off the deep end, but try to get a grip on something: they asked for the technology, they were trained on using the technology, and in many ways it's not the technology itself they struggle with... BUT IN TEACHING WITH IT; something they're supposed to be good at doing already.

So, while I do respect you and your opinions here, I think there is a bit of a gap in your understanding of this issue. I am not faulting you for it, but it just seems like you refuse to acknowledge any problem with the system that could be rectified WITHOUT setting unions up as the sacred cow.

Ditto.

 

[Ninjahedge]

I see an effectiveness problem. Unions haven't been effective on the policy front, have they? No, instead they've done nothing but ask for more and more pay and driven many states and school districts to make major cuts.

you are blaming the person who is shot for being in the way of the bullet.

Two things are a problem with your position.

1. Teachers (in general) are paid crap for their education and experience levels.
2. Executive/Administrative staff is often included in the budget. The Golden Parachute problem with a school supervisor at my HS made it so that his 20% pay increase for the last two years of his "service" was done at the expense of the teachers themselves, and then the pension fund then had to bear the brunt of an inflated pension after he retired.

All the Union's fault.

Sure.

I've seen extra-curricular programs, art, music, foreign language programs, and transportation cut in districts simply because the unions wouldn't accept a pay freeze. That kind of bullshit has to stop.

Ah, so BECAUSE a professional does not accept being paid the same or less, it is all their fault that the children suffer. Not the state for not allocating more funding.

Straw man.

By all means, feel free to go off the deep end, but try to get a grip on something: they asked for the technology, they were trained on using the technology, and in many ways it's not the technology itself they struggle with... BUT IN TEACHING WITH IT; something they're supposed to be good at doing already.

Deep end makes no sense. Nice way to discredit w/o actually responding to the assertions posted......

As for "them" asking for it. People, ALL people "ask" for things. Getting them to USE it is another thing altogether.

Also, your definition of "they" is vague. Sometimes "they" is just the guy that is making the decisions (department chair?) who may, like many of us, want to get people to try something new. But "They" end up speaking for all when it may only be a few that truly desire to use it.


And associating this with Unions and pressuring people to change or leave, is not a fair conjunction.

Ditto.

After having a mother teach in a number of schools for most of my life (probably a good 30 years), and knowing her co-workers, and reading the news, and being aware from many angles what this is like, hearing a person say they know more simply because they tried to teach teachers technology (TTT) is a bit of a stretch.

Stop smelling the mimeograph fluid there bubbie (and yes, I remember being in the "ditto room" with my mother more than 20 years ago over the summer as she prepared her lesson plans).

 

[DrPizza]

A coincidence, no... but I don't think a lack of unions is the cause. I do know that private schools very often rank highly in education quality and student achievement. Is a lack of unions the cause? Not entirely, but it is a part.

It's virtually meaningless to compare results at private schools with results at public schools. Private schools get to pick and choose who gets in. Students don't get into private schools if their parents don't give a damn about their educations. Students whose parents care do better. Students whose parents don't care do worse. Is this some surprise?

And, unless the private school pays more, it's very difficult to retain good teachers. In my area, there's a private Catholic high school. The pay for a teacher is horrendous. They cannot retain good teachers. Anyone who knows their stuff simply uses them as a stepping stone until a public school job opens up.

 

[Exterous]

You didn't add anything beyond anecdotes, either.

I don't know if my genius insight into the heart of the problem counts as 'nothing'...

I see an effectiveness problem. Unions haven't been effective on the policy front, have they? No, instead they've done nothing but ask for more and more pay and driven many states and school districts to make major cuts.

Christ - why do you continue to make sweeping generalizations that are not true everywhere? Thats why I keep making my anechdotes - to show that the broad generalizations are often incorrect. They certainly do not hold true everywhere so constantly touting an anti-union stance ignores the many other important issues facing our education system. If you want to look at a specific school district then it may be ok to blame the majority of the problems on the union but to place the majority to the blame on unions across the US is grossly unfair and completely inaccurate. If you want to try and make that claim you had better back up your accusation of guilt

 

[zsdersw]

you are blaming the person who is shot for being in the way of the bullet.

Two things are a problem with your position.

1. Teachers (in general) are paid crap for their education and experience levels.

Crap? How do you quantify "crap"?

2. Executive/Administrative staff is often included in the budget. The Golden Parachute problem with a school supervisor at my HS made it so that his 20% pay increase for the last two years of his "service" was done at the expense of the teachers themselves, and then the pension fund then had to bear the brunt of an inflated pension after he retired.

All the Union's fault.

I've worked in 5 school districts in my career, and exactly 0 of them have the scenario you've described. Personnel in every district I've worked have been divided up as follows: Professional Staff (teachers), Support Staff (aides, custodians, secretaries, etc), and At-Will Employees. In the 15 years I've been employed in public education, I've never seen administrative staff get raises greater than what the union employees received. In my current district, for example, at-will employees (like myself, and which includes the superintendent & principals) received no raise in each of the last two years while union employees received a 4% raise.

Ah, so BECAUSE a professional does not accept being paid the same or less, it is all their fault that the children suffer. Not the state for not allocating more funding.

Straw man.

Ah, so BECAUSE the state doesn't allocate more funding, it is all their fault that the children suffer.. not teachers for being unhappy with a pay freeze. Perhaps these teachers would've liked pink slips instead?

Deep end makes no sense. Nice way to discredit w/o actually responding to the assertions posted......

As for "them" asking for it. People, ALL people "ask" for things. Getting them to USE it is another thing altogether.

Also, your definition of "they" is vague. Sometimes "they" is just the guy that is making the decisions (department chair?) who may, like many of us, want to get people to try something new. But "They" end up speaking for all when it may only be a few that truly desire to use it.

"They" is the teachers themselves; the exact teachers that received the technology and training.

After having a mother teach in a number of schools for most of my life (probably a good 30 years), and knowing her co-workers, and reading the news, and being aware from many angles what this is like, hearing a person say they know more simply because they tried to teach teachers technology (TTT) is a bit of a stretch.

Stop smelling the mimeograph fluid there bubbie (and yes, I remember being in the "ditto room" with my mother more than 20 years ago over the summer as she prepared her lesson plans).

Yes, I'm sure all of that weighs more than actually working in multiple school districts for almost an entire career thus far. 🙄