Potential Chicago-area teacher strike

[3rdnlng]

You're pissing in the wind. Pointing out anyone's hypocrisy will not fix this.

 

Fire all the teachers. All of them. Period. Nothing will fix their ego-driven, self-serving, money-grubbing asses faster than finding themselves out of work. Do you have any idea how EASY it would be to fill those posts with unemployed teachers?

 

Fire them. All of them. C'mon Rahm, you big nutsucker. Do it. For the children.

 

As Joe Biden would say, "I have two words for you": Air Traffic Controllers.

[uncle flap]

Some of you guys just don't get it.

 

 

1. Here's why tenure is important: Tenure gives GOOD teachers security. Without tenure, they could be laid off and replaced by inexperienced teachers at a lower salary, regardless of their classroom performance. So without tenure- administrators/districts aren't judging teachers based on their merit (however you want to define it) at all, simply by how much it costs to pay their salaries. Does that sound like the best thing for the children? Well, which is it? The $ or the children?

 

2. The reason that teachers or anyone who can afford private school wouldn't send their children to public school is not because of the quality of the teachers, it's the quality of the environment. I wish that those of you that are so quick to condemn these teachers could set foot in a classroom for one day and see what it is really like. I can't blame the kids, but being the product of an impoverished environment often leads to a litany of problems that manifest in the school and and in the classroom. Not that being poor in and of itself directly ill-prepares a child to productively participate in a learning environment, but absentee parents, addiction, and the impact of a variety of crimes all play a detrimental role in whether or not a child can succeed. You can put a damn good teacher in a class of troubled kids, but more often than not, his or her influence pales in comparison to the influence of those kids' parents and their home environments.

 

2a. The problems facing education in America are not due to anything involved with what teachers are doing wrong (or not doing right, whatever). The oft-quoted stats about where the US lines up with other industrialized nations are misleading. If you disregard the wealthy and the poor, the middle class students line up right with all the other countries we envy. So it's not that the US is falling behind in math and science, it's that the US stats include a great number of students who are affected by negative out-of-school factors (OSFs).

 

I'm sure none of you want to learn more about this but here is a study about this topic: http://nepc.colorado.edu/publication/poverty-and-potential

 

 

Because America’s schools are so highly segregated by income, race, and ethnicity, problems related to poverty occur simultaneously, with greater frequency, and act cumulatively in schools serving disadvantaged communities. These schools therefore face significantly greater challenges than schools serving wealthier children, and their limited resources are often overwhelmed. Efforts to improve educational outcomes in these schools, attempting to drive change through test-based accountability, are thus unlikely to succeed unless accompanied by policies to address the OSFs that negatively affect large numbers of our nations’ students. Poverty limits student potential; inputs to schools affect outputs from them.

[ExiledInIllinois]

Some of you guys just don't get it.

 

 

1. Here's why tenure is important: Tenure gives GOOD teachers security. Without tenure, they could be laid off and replaced by inexperienced teachers at a lower salary, regardless of their classroom performance. So without tenure- administrators/districts aren't judging teachers based on their merit (however you want to define it) at all, simply by how much it costs to pay their salaries. Does that sound like the best thing for the children? Well, which is it? The $ or the children?

 

2. The reason that teachers or anyone who can afford private school wouldn't send their children to public school is not because of the quality of the teachers, it's the quality of the environment. I wish that those of you that are so quick to condemn these teachers could set foot in a classroom for one day and see what it is really like. I can't blame the kids, but being the product of an impoverished environment often leads to a litany of problems that manifest in the school and and in the classroom. Not that being poor in and of itself directly ill-prepares a child to productively participate in a learning environment, but absentee parents, addiction, and the impact of a variety of crimes all play a detrimental role in whether or not a child can succeed. You can put a damn good teacher in a class of troubled kids, but more often than not, his or her influence pales in comparison to the influence of those kids' parents and their home environments.

 

2a. The problems facing education in America are not due to anything involved with what teachers are doing wrong (or not doing right, whatever). The oft-quoted stats about where the US lines up with other industrialized nations are misleading. If you disregard the wealthy and the poor, the middle class students line up right with all the other countries we envy. So it's not that the US is falling behind in math and science, it's that the US stats include a great number of students who are affected by negative out-of-school factors (OSFs).

 

I'm sure none of you want to learn more about this but here is a study about this topic: http://nepc.colorado...y-and-potential

 

+1

[Rob's House]

Some of you guys just don't get it.

 

 

1. Here's why tenure is important: Tenure gives GOOD teachers security. Without tenure, they could be laid off and replaced by inexperienced teachers at a lower salary, regardless of their classroom performance. So without tenure- administrators/districts aren't judging teachers based on their merit (however you want to define it) at all, simply by how much it costs to pay their salaries. Does that sound like the best thing for the children? Well, which is it? The $ or the children?

 

2. The reason that teachers or anyone who can afford private school wouldn't send their children to public school is not because of the quality of the teachers, it's the quality of the environment. I wish that those of you that are so quick to condemn these teachers could set foot in a classroom for one day and see what it is really like. I can't blame the kids, but being the product of an impoverished environment often leads to a litany of problems that manifest in the school and and in the classroom. Not that being poor in and of itself directly ill-prepares a child to productively participate in a learning environment, but absentee parents, addiction, and the impact of a variety of crimes all play a detrimental role in whether or not a child can succeed. You can put a damn good teacher in a class of troubled kids, but more often than not, his or her influence pales in comparison to the influence of those kids' parents and their home environments.

 

2a. The problems facing education in America are not due to anything involved with what teachers are doing wrong (or not doing right, whatever). The oft-quoted stats about where the US lines up with other industrialized nations are misleading. If you disregard the wealthy and the poor, the middle class students line up right with all the other countries we envy. So it's not that the US is falling behind in math and science, it's that the US stats include a great number of students who are affected by negative out-of-school factors (OSFs).

 

I'm sure none of you want to learn more about this but here is a study about this topic: http://nepc.colorado...y-and-potential

1. Sorry, you're just not making a very compelling argument here. If these problems are pervasive in certain school districts it seems like the problems are structural and tenure is a band aid on a broken bone. School districts that operate that way will lose good teachers to school districts that make education a priority.

 

2. I agree. If you have a community with parents and students that are concerned about education the problems will take care of themselves. Blaming teachers, funding, etc. is a cop out. They say it takes a village, but some villages do nothing but hold you back.

[Doc]

Too many people want others to fix their problems for them.

1. Sorry, you're just not making a very compelling argument here. If these problems are pervasive in certain school districts it seems like the problems are structural and tenure is a band aid on a broken bone. School districts that operate that way will lose good teachers to school districts that make education a priority.

 

2. I agree. If you have a community with parents and students that are concerned about education the problems will take care of themselves. Blaming teachers, funding, etc. is a cop out. They say it takes a village, but some villages do nothing but hold you back.

1. Shouldn't cops, firefighters, etc. get tenure as well?

 

2. The problem is too many people expect other people to fix their problems instead of trying to fix them themselves. So a parent or parents who don't care whether their kid applies him/herself in school says "it's the system/teachers/society/rich/etc."

[Wacka]

+1

- googleplex

[uncle flap]

1. Sorry, you're just not making a very compelling argument here. If these problems are pervasive in certain school districts it seems like the problems are structural and tenure is a band aid on a broken bone. School districts that operate that way will lose good teachers to school districts that make education a priority.

 

1. Shouldn't cops, firefighters, etc. get tenure as well?

 

2. The problem is too many people expect other people to fix their problems instead of trying to fix them themselves. So a parent or parents who don't care whether their kid applies him/herself in school says "it's the system/teachers/society/rich/etc."

 

1. Thankfully, those problems are not pervasive because "tenure" exists. Tenure in a non-university setting is merely code for the NEGOTIATED protections unions provide to their members. So, cops and firefighters and basically any group of unionized professionals already do have "tenure." It seems a lot of you guys are hung up on that word. For public school teachers it doesn't guarantee anything besides due process. What that means is to be fired or otherwise dismissed, an employer must show that there is just cause in doing so. Tenure, or the same job security enjoyed by police and fire, does not mean a guaranteed job. It just means that one can't be fired simply because they can be replaced by someone cheaper, or any other unjustified reason.

 

So, you mean to tell me in the cash strapped public school districts all over the country, you wouldn't see GOOD, PRODUCTIVE teachers laid off for cheaper unproven ones, if the teachers didn't have union protection? Oh, the people wouldn't stand for it? Just remind them that their taxes are that much lower.

 

2. It isn't simply that parents "don't care" - though in many cases, that is true. It is also that parents are unable to provide basic needs for themselves and their families. If the kids even show up to school, they can be sick and malnourished. The kids might not have slept all night because of the gangbangers partying outside their window, and are therefore falling asleep in class. The things that you and I see as crazy or stupid seem normal to them.

 

If you haven't guessed I'm a teacher in a school with 85% of the population living below the poverty line and the other 15 is at or barely above it. I could go on about what the "real" problems are, but it seems most of you are too hung up on anti-union rhetoric to realize why teacher salaries have little to do with the financial problems facing large urban districts. (Hint: take a look at the number of administrators (and their salaries) per teacher compared to the number of teachers per student.)

 

Based on your general opinions on this side of the board, I'd guess most of you won't like my solutions either. (Hint: It doesn't have to do with pulling up by one's own bootstraps.)

Edited September 18, 2012 by uncle flap

[Doc]

1. Thankfully, those problems are not pervasive because "tenure" exists. Tenure in a non-university setting is merely code for the NEGOTIATED protections unions provide to their members. So, cops and firefighters and basically any group of unionized professionals already do have "tenure." It seems a lot of you guys are hung up on that word. For public school teachers it doesn't guarantee anything besides due process. What that means is to be fired or otherwise dismissed, an employer must show that there is just cause in doing so. Tenure, or the same job security enjoyed by police and fire, does not mean a guaranteed job. It just means that one can't be fired simply because they can be replaced by someone cheaper, or any other unjustified reason.

 

So, you mean to tell me in the cash strapped public school districts all over the country, you wouldn't see GOOD, PRODUCTIVE teachers laid off for cheaper unproven ones, if the teachers didn't have union protection? Oh, the people wouldn't stand for it? Just remind them that their taxes are that much lower.

 

2. It isn't simply that parents "don't care" - though in many cases, that is true. It is also that parents are unable to provide basic needs for themselves and their families. If the kids even show up to school, they can be sick and malnourished. The kids might not have slept all night because of the gangbangers partying outside their window, and are therefore falling asleep in class. The things that you and I see as crazy or stupid seem normal to them.

 

If you haven't guessed I'm a teacher in a school with 85% of the population living below the poverty line and the other 15 is at or barely above it. I could go on about what the "real" problems are, but it seems most of you are too hung up on anti-union rhetoric to realize why teacher salaries have little to do with the financial problems facing large urban districts. (Hint: take a look at the number of administrators (and their salaries) per teacher compared to the number of teachers per student.)

 

Based on your general opinions on this side of the board, I'd guess most of you won't like my solutions either. (Hint: It doesn't have to do with pulling up by one's own bootstraps.)

Try me.

[DC Tom]

Based on your general opinions on this side of the board, I'd guess most of you won't like my solutions either. (Hint: It doesn't have to do with pulling up by one's own bootstraps.)

 

I'm guessing they're only tenuously based in reality, which is the real reason most of us won't like them.

[tomato can]

 

Nice work, unions. Maybe one day you really will think about the kids, you selfish hostage-holding money-grubbing pricks.

 

 

Dude you are so full of crap its coming out of your ears! Yes they want to be paid like everyone else that works a job. They were suppose to receive a 4% raise last year and didn't get it because the city said they didn't have the money. The teachers were not seeking a kings ransom, they were okay with a 4% increase last year and are okay with it this year. There are more important matters at hand that were not being addressed. In 2011, a provision was added to the Illinois Educational Labor Relations Act that makes it illegal for teachers to strike on all matters except compensation involving pay and benefits. The teachers had to make salary an issue in order to strike over classroom conditions in Chicago public schools. What is clear is there are multiple systemic problems with Chicago public schools that certainly warrant the teachers taking a stand. Class sizes in Chicago are largest in the state of Illinois, on average only a quarter of Chicago public schools offer arts and music education, there are 370 social workers for 15,000 homeless children, one hundred and sixty schools do not have libraries, schools lack air conditioning, roofs that do not leak, textbooks, & Chicago continues to close schools or “turnaround” schools by firing by teacher and staff to improve student learning without any evidence that this meaningfully benefits students. Simply focusing on teachers as the reason for low performance ignores the lack of resources in schools that make it difficult for learning. Teachers are striking so that the city of Chicago will allocate more resources for these kids as. You continue to ignor these facts and try and make it sound as if these teachers are just on strike for money only.

[B-Man]

The teachers were not seeking a kings ransom, they were okay with a 4% increase last year and are okay with it this year.

 

This is untrue.

[tomato can]

This is untrue.

 

The tentative contract in Chicago calls for a 3 percent raise in its first year and 2 percent for two years after that, along with increases for experienced teachers. While many teachers are upset it did not restore a 4 percent pay raise Emanuel rescinded earlier this year!

[3rdnlng]

Dude you are so full of crap its coming out of your ears! Yes they want to be paid like everyone else that works a job. They were suppose to receive a 4% raise last year and didn't get it because the city said they didn't have the money. The teachers were not seeking a kings ransom, they were okay with a 4% increase last year and are okay with it this year. There are more important matters at hand that were not being addressed. In 2011, a provision was added to the Illinois Educational Labor Relations Act that makes it illegal for teachers to strike on all matters except compensation involving pay and benefits. The teachers had to make salary an issue in order to strike over classroom conditions in Chicago public schools. What is clear is there are multiple systemic problems with Chicago public schools that certainly warrant the teachers taking a stand. Class sizes in Chicago are largest in the state of Illinois, on average only a quarter of Chicago public schools offer arts and music education, there are 370 social workers for 15,000 homeless children, one hundred and sixty schools do not have libraries, schools lack air conditioning, roofs that do not leak, textbooks, & Chicago continues to close schools or “turnaround” schools by firing by teacher and staff to improve student learning without any evidence that this meaningfully benefits students. Simply focusing on teachers as the reason for low performance ignores the lack of resources in schools that make it difficult for learning. Teachers are striking so that the city of Chicago will allocate more resources for these kids as. You continue to ignor these facts and try and make it sound as if these teachers are just on strike for money only.

 

You are truly a tomato can.

[Doc]

I'm guessing they're only tenuously based in reality, which is the real reason most of us won't like them.

Well, not having it primarily revolve around "it all starts at home" gives me pause that it's a real solution. But I'd like to hear it, nonetheless.

[ExiledInIllinois]

You are truly a tomato can.

 

For a tomato can... They sure gave you some facts... Now back up your side of the argument w/facts... Oh wait, you can't.

[meazza]

For a tomato can... They sure gave you some facts... Now back up your side of the argument w/facts... Oh wait, you can't.

 

Let's not pretend you ever cared about facts toll monkey.

[3rdnlng]

For a tomato can... They sure gave you some facts... Now back up your side of the argument w/facts... Oh wait, you can't.

 

The idiot clown is still hanging around? You have nothing, again.

[Wacka]

Reminds me when I worked in biotech. The company laid off about 1/3 of the company in October. We got a 5% raise on 1/1. One guy was complaining athat it was only 5%. I told him we should be lucky we still had a job. They laid off another 1/3 on Valentine's Day including him and me.

[meazza]

Reminds me when I worked in biotech. The company laid off about 1/3 of the company in October. We got a 5% raise on 1/1. One guy was complaining athat it was only 5%. I told him we should be lucky we still had a job. They laid off another 1/3 on Valentine's Day including him and me.

 

Did they give you flowers and chocolates?

[B-Man]

The tentative contract in Chicago calls for a 3 percent raise in its first year and 2 percent for two years after that, along with increases for experienced teachers. While many teachers are upset it did not restore a 4 percent pay raise Emanuel rescinded earlier this year!

 

Link please.

 

Otherwise..................this is also untrue.

 

 

 

.