Education: Fire, Not Hire!

[Jackson]

You are wrong. But, in your heart, you knew that.

Nope. I am wholly correct.
The teachers unions are not totally at fault - however there is no chance of real improvement without abolishing the union system in our schools. And a whooooole lot of teachers will say the same.

So, your suggestion is we fix the schools by first turning teachers into second class citizens. An interesting approach. Somehow, I doubt a whoooooole lot of teachers will agree.

Teachers are not the problem and the union is not the problem. They are just an easy scapegoat.

The union is the problem. It is very difficult to get rid of bad teachers. I was a union rep and can attest to that.

 

[Jackson]

If I were a teacher coming out of college now I'd head for a foreign country where they are respected and where education is deemed important. In america people talk a good game but really this country isnt all that interested in education. That is a fact.

Unfortunately, our culture does not hold education and teachers in high esteem as other countries do. You are right. It goes along with the entitlement culture we have rather than working and earning for what you get. We are reaping what we have sown.

 

[AquaAthena]

If I were a teacher coming out of college now I'd head for a foreign country where they are respected and where education is deemed important. In america people talk a good game but really this country isnt all that interested in education. That is a fact.

Unfortunately, our culture does not hold education and teachers in high esteem as other countries do. You are right. It goes along with the entitlement culture we have rather than working and earning for what you get. We are reaping what we have sown.

And the answer is NOT more money being poured into education. The answer is better parents. Fat chance!

 

[Wiseacre]

Another answer is more competition, wherever it is feasible to have alternative(s) to the public school system.

 

[PoliticalChic]

There is nothing inherently evil about unions, but in this country unions have evolved to be a very destructive force, especially in Academe. They fight "management" to get as much as they can, and they see it as their obligation to protect the job security of every single union member - especially the worst ones.

One of the major sections in every teachers' contract is the complex and impenetrable procedure for disciplining a teacher who breaks a rule. And every Bargaining Unit has teachers who are incompetent, lazy, and who should have been jettisoned years ago. But ask your local HR representative how many teachers got "unsatisfactory" performance reviews last year (I have, several times), and when you cut through all the bullshit the answer is ZERO.

Instead of complaining about standardized tests being irrelevant, the NEA should be in the forefront of developing tests and other evaluation tools that permit the schools to assess students' progress and explore new initiatives that might achieve some success. But the only initiatives that the NEA is interested in are the ones that mean more money or benefits for teachers (e.g., smaller class sizes).

The school system mirrors our country in many ways. Just as we have an "income gap" that keeps getting bigger and bigger (which I don't see as a problem), we have an education gap, where the kids from the best (generally) suburban public schools can get a fabulous education - equivalent to a good private school, while inner city kids are lucky they can learn the basics because of the classroom behavior problems, teacher apathy, and disengaged parents.

And ironically, money is demonstrably not the answer. Some of the most expensive school districts in the country (e.g., our nation's capital) have the worst educational outcomes, and parochial schools spending well under $10k/kid are kicking ass, as they always have (with non-union teachers making $35k/yr).

But honestly, is there any other factor in this whole picture that has had a more destructive effect than the teachers' unions? I can't think of any.

"There is nothing inherently evil about unions,..."

Agree.


"is there any other factor in this whole picture that has had a more destructive effect than the teachers' unions?"

Absolutely.
The elected officials that rubber stamp each and every demand.

hopefully you mean demands of legilators that don't have a clue about the educational process
judges legislating from the bench and

parents demanding their child be cured

The function of the union is to advance the cause of their members. There need be no limitations on what they 'request.'

The function of elected officials is to make decisions in the best interests of the public and to guard the fisc.


If officials are ignoring those obligations in the interests of buying union votes, it seems to me that there should either be a criminal penalty, or a requirement that the official self-purchase insurance to make whole the body that his or her actions have injured.

I could see the politician's insurance costs be commensurate with the pol's record and/or capacity to do harm.


Quite a fantasy, eh?

 

[blimpo]

Another answer is more competition, wherever it is feasible to have alternative(s) to the public school system.

There are many alternatives out there.

Don't ask me to pay for them.

 

[Wiseacre]

Another answer is more competition, wherever it is feasible to have alternative(s) to the public school system.

There are many alternatives out there.

Don't ask me to pay for them.

Why not? You don't want to support a better education system? If there's one thing about free market capitalism, it's that more choices means better and cheaper products and services. And education is no exception.

 

[blimpo]

Another answer is more competition, wherever it is feasible to have alternative(s) to the public school system.

There are many alternatives out there.

Don't ask me to pay for them.

Why not? You don't want to support a better education system? If there's one thing about free market capitalism, it's that more choices means better and cheaper products and services. And education is no exception.

Competition is a great reason to schedule a track meet.

Public schools can't recruit. They must take whatever walks in the door.
How is it true competition when on one end you have a 10 foot goal and on the other end a smaller 12 foot goal and decide teams won't trade ends in the 2nd half.

You want competition? Level the field first...

 

[Wiseacre]

There are many alternatives out there.

Don't ask me to pay for them.

Why not? You don't want to support a better education system? If there's one thing about free market capitalism, it's that more choices means better and cheaper products and services. And education is no exception.

Competition is a great reason to schedule a track meet.

Public schools can't recruit. They must take whatever walks in the door.
How is it true competition when on one end you have a 10 foot goal and on the other end a smaller 12 foot goal and decide teams won't trade ends in the 2nd half.

You want competition? Level the field first...

You seem to have missed the point. The public school system has no choice as you said, but the parents do, or should. They should have more than one option, in addition to the public schools. And your tax dollars ought to pay for their voucher to send their kids to a better school. At least partly, relative to their income and to a certain point.

Which means the public schools had better get their act together or start losing out on revenue.