I'm a teacher. Here's why I am cheering my new freedom from unions

[buckeye45_73]

You're assuming that being an effective teacher is irrelevant.

Considering the curriculum I’ve seen in most schools these days, it is irrelevant.

What does that mean? I've had some good teachers and some bad ones, but I remember the great ones like my 7th Grade social Studies teacher, she was fantastic. If you have no incentive to perform, then you get shitty results. Which is why the school system sucks like it does. The unions control everything. teachers cant do anything without their approval. They cant innovate, they cant discipline, they cant do anything to make a subject fun and exciting.

I'm don't know about the union stuff affecting what a teacher can do in a classroom, but I do know all the geniuses at the dept. of education do everything they can to prevent teachers from teaching. Over a month a year, they force teachers to teach students to take a test that does nothing for college admissions.

Again, standardized testing is the only way to make sure people are being taught. I'm a big fan of it. The problem is whats in the test. It should be basic stuff, easy and then you can move on to more difficult things.We had a test in high school (my sr year we were doing the test but we didn't have to pass, but the classes afterward did) And man was it easy, I don't know how anyone could fail it......it was like a citizen ship test.......it's easy crap, how does anyone not know such basic things?

BALONEY!

The best way of making sure students are being taught is parental oversight and involvement.

Standardized tests are gamed; and all students end up being "taught" is how to pass a bogus test. That is not education.

I agree parent need to be involved, but how do you compare what people learn from city to city, state to state?
You need to have some kind of idea of where people are. Like I said, it should be very basic simple stuff. But we have to have a way to compare students and see who is doing well.

 

[buckeye45_73]

Why should people who make $50k vote democrat?

Social security and medicare

You mean if they vote Republican, they won't get SS and Medicare?

You know it's the GOP's dream to do away with these socialist programs. You know you believe they are unconstitutional. You guys deny your real motives while you slowly chip away at things like ss, medicare and roe v wade.

Admit you believe you'd do better if they did away with those programs and you invest that money yourself, which you wouldn't. You're already having a tough time making ends meet. You would just spend that money and we'd have to take care of you if you could no longer work.

SS is a great program. I may die at 66 and never take a penny out. But I may also live to be 100 and then I'll collect for the rest of my life. What a great program that you guys want to destroy.

And we are waiting for Republicans to make healthcare more affordable.

They polled 100 Republicans. They all like the Affordable Care Act but they hate Obamacare. Dumb fucks.

So you admit SS is a Ponzi scheme


Check...

SS is nothing like as Ponzi scheme. Retirees get benefits as promised. There is no scam. Dumbass.

So do people in a Ponzi scheme until it collapses. what is the difference between SS and a Ponzi Scheme?

 

[buckeye45_73]

Computer Software Applications Engineers Salary and Wage Information

Computer Programmer Salary and Wage Information

Computer Systems Software Engineer Salary and Wage Information

Are you a high end computer programmer/developer or are you just a grunt?

"50% (Median)" indicates that 50% of workers earned less and 50% earned more

Because I bet you are in the 50% who makes less than $79,000.

How much less? Do they make $50K a year? Not that good of a profession then huh?

Yeah, don't bet what you can't afford to lose...dumbass.

You can't win with me. If you make $50K, you're an idiot. If you make $100K then I get why you vote GOP. Just don't tell people who make $50K they should be voting GOP because they are in a different tax bracket than you.

Why should people who make $50k vote democrat?

Social security and medicare

Govt programs, how new.
You do realize that unless there is reform, they go bye bye.

 

[buckeye45_73]

Yeah, don't bet what you can't afford to lose...dumbass.

You can't win with me. If you make $50K, you're an idiot. If you make $100K then I get why you vote GOP. Just don't tell people who make $50K they should be voting GOP because they are in a different tax bracket than you.

First of all, you are pretentious. $50000 is more than average. I do make more than that, but so what? I just finished school and have started in this profession.
That's how you get ahead, you don't stay in the same job for 30 years expecting raises......you gain new skills and get a new job or promotion.
But I vote GOP, because I have certain policy and principal positions that they espouse.
Pro Life
Pro Gun
Small Govt
Lower Taxes ( I want the income tax gone, but i'll take lower taxes for now)
Traditional Values
Fair Trade (I used to be Free trade, but I didn't know people were lying when they talked about it)
Pro immigration, very anti illegal immigration
Build the Wall
Strong military
Patriotism
No hate
no harassing people for political views


these are just a few things. Some in the GOP don't agree with me on all those issues, but atleast we don't try and harass each other like the left.....what a collection of tards they are.

I can tell by your list you are a lost cause. Good luck. You'll need it.

Lost cause? what does that mean?

The right has you with every wedge issue

Sure, I'm culturally conservative and economically conservative/libertarian
But I atleast gave you a list. I'm not afraid of my beliefs and positions. I'm honest about them and it's nice to not have to lie and make up shit...I don't know how you lefties do it, it's gotta be stressful and tiring.

 

[RealDave]

Are you a high end computer programmer/developer or are you just a grunt?

"50% (Median)" indicates that 50% of workers earned less and 50% earned more

Because I bet you are in the 50% who makes less than $79,000.

How much less? Do they make $50K a year? Not that good of a profession then huh?

Yeah, don't bet what you can't afford to lose...dumbass.

You can't win with me. If you make $50K, you're an idiot. If you make $100K then I get why you vote GOP. Just don't tell people who make $50K they should be voting GOP because they are in a different tax bracket than you.

Why should people who make $50k vote democrat?

Social security and medicare

Govt programs, how new.
You do realize that unless there is reform, they go bye bye.

HOLY SHIT!!!!!!!!

Programs that last years need to be revised to changing demographics.

Who knew?

 

[buckeye45_73]

You mean they will get paid by their performance instead? What a crazy system that is.

No. They will now get paid by what the local School Department wants to pay them. I gonna be interested to see how the Union teachers vote in public elections for school board members who give non-Union teachers ANY additional benefit or pay. I can guess, but we’ll see.

yeah, that is true, but so what? If you want good teachers you should have to pay for them, this govt teir system based on seniority is an abomination. It should be about performance, not how many years you've been there.

How do you measure performance? It’s not a used car lot, it’s a classroom . There’s so many variables.

True, one reason I do believe in standardized testing. I also think that how the students behave (and yes give teachers more power to control their classrooms), how they do in the future, should all be things we can look at. and we need to FIRE bad teachers and corrupt ones.

 

[buckeye45_73]

Yeah, don't bet what you can't afford to lose...dumbass.

You can't win with me. If you make $50K, you're an idiot. If you make $100K then I get why you vote GOP. Just don't tell people who make $50K they should be voting GOP because they are in a different tax bracket than you.

Why should people who make $50k vote democrat?

Social security and medicare

Govt programs, how new.
You do realize that unless there is reform, they go bye bye.

HOLY SHIT!!!!!!!!

Programs that last years need to be revised to changing demographics.

Who knew?

apparently the left doesn't know.......they want zero change to any of these programs.

 

[buckeye45_73]

Why didn’t she get the union to change that in the contract?

But hey, go see how awesome things aren’t union schools . Good luck having everything being decided by politics and connections .

How do you think unions work? you just described it........you are so naive

I’ve worked union and non.

The union is barely an issue . They only time you even hear from them is during contract negotiations or when there’s a dispute .

Are they perfect ? No . But at least you have a contract and clear job descriptions .

Well the problem is people are forced to join them. They shouldnt' be, if they are so good, it shouldn't require compulsion.

 

[dblack]

Why didn’t she get the union to change that in the contract?

But hey, go see how awesome things aren’t union schools . Good luck having everything being decided by politics and connections .

How do you think unions work? you just described it........you are so naive

I’ve worked union and non.

The union is barely an issue . They only time you even hear from them is during contract negotiations or when there’s a dispute .

Are they perfect ? No . But at least you have a contract and clear job descriptions .

Well the problem is people are forced to join them. They shouldnt' be, if they are so good, it shouldn't require compulsion.

That problem isn't that people are 'forced' to unions. That's not really true. If an employer voluntarily signs a contract, agreeing to only hire union members, that's valid and fair. The problem is deeper, with the labor law that allows unions to essentially force themselves on employers - forcing them to sign a contract.

 

[boedicca]

Considering the curriculum I’ve seen in most schools these days, it is irrelevant.

What does that mean? I've had some good teachers and some bad ones, but I remember the great ones like my 7th Grade social Studies teacher, she was fantastic. If you have no incentive to perform, then you get shitty results. Which is why the school system sucks like it does. The unions control everything. teachers cant do anything without their approval. They cant innovate, they cant discipline, they cant do anything to make a subject fun and exciting.

I'm don't know about the union stuff affecting what a teacher can do in a classroom, but I do know all the geniuses at the dept. of education do everything they can to prevent teachers from teaching. Over a month a year, they force teachers to teach students to take a test that does nothing for college admissions.

Again, standardized testing is the only way to make sure people are being taught. I'm a big fan of it. The problem is whats in the test. It should be basic stuff, easy and then you can move on to more difficult things.We had a test in high school (my sr year we were doing the test but we didn't have to pass, but the classes afterward did) And man was it easy, I don't know how anyone could fail it......it was like a citizen ship test.......it's easy crap, how does anyone not know such basic things?

BALONEY!

The best way of making sure students are being taught is parental oversight and involvement.

Standardized tests are gamed; and all students end up being "taught" is how to pass a bogus test. That is not education.

I agree parent need to be involved, but how do you compare what people learn from city to city, state to state?
You need to have some kind of idea of where people are. Like I said, it should be very basic simple stuff. But we have to have a way to compare students and see who is doing well.

I don't care about comparing that. We have SATs etc for colleges; such tests are enough.

The best judges of learning are the local people responsible for the kids. Curriculums were stronger and resulted in better educated students overall before the Feds ruined things.

 

[buckeye45_73]

What does that mean? I've had some good teachers and some bad ones, but I remember the great ones like my 7th Grade social Studies teacher, she was fantastic. If you have no incentive to perform, then you get shitty results. Which is why the school system sucks like it does. The unions control everything. teachers cant do anything without their approval. They cant innovate, they cant discipline, they cant do anything to make a subject fun and exciting.

I'm don't know about the union stuff affecting what a teacher can do in a classroom, but I do know all the geniuses at the dept. of education do everything they can to prevent teachers from teaching. Over a month a year, they force teachers to teach students to take a test that does nothing for college admissions.

Again, standardized testing is the only way to make sure people are being taught. I'm a big fan of it. The problem is whats in the test. It should be basic stuff, easy and then you can move on to more difficult things.We had a test in high school (my sr year we were doing the test but we didn't have to pass, but the classes afterward did) And man was it easy, I don't know how anyone could fail it......it was like a citizen ship test.......it's easy crap, how does anyone not know such basic things?

BALONEY!

The best way of making sure students are being taught is parental oversight and involvement.

Standardized tests are gamed; and all students end up being "taught" is how to pass a bogus test. That is not education.

I agree parent need to be involved, but how do you compare what people learn from city to city, state to state?
You need to have some kind of idea of where people are. Like I said, it should be very basic simple stuff. But we have to have a way to compare students and see who is doing well.

I don't care about comparing that. We have SATs etc for colleges; such tests are enough.

The best judges of learning are the local people responsible for the kids. Curriculums were stronger and resulted in better educated students overall before the Feds ruined things.

Like I said, states can do it. But we have to have something to show what kids are learning. We need some metrics to measure the progress.

 

[boedicca]

I'm don't know about the union stuff affecting what a teacher can do in a classroom, but I do know all the geniuses at the dept. of education do everything they can to prevent teachers from teaching. Over a month a year, they force teachers to teach students to take a test that does nothing for college admissions.

Again, standardized testing is the only way to make sure people are being taught. I'm a big fan of it. The problem is whats in the test. It should be basic stuff, easy and then you can move on to more difficult things.We had a test in high school (my sr year we were doing the test but we didn't have to pass, but the classes afterward did) And man was it easy, I don't know how anyone could fail it......it was like a citizen ship test.......it's easy crap, how does anyone not know such basic things?

BALONEY!

The best way of making sure students are being taught is parental oversight and involvement.

Standardized tests are gamed; and all students end up being "taught" is how to pass a bogus test. That is not education.

I agree parent need to be involved, but how do you compare what people learn from city to city, state to state?
You need to have some kind of idea of where people are. Like I said, it should be very basic simple stuff. But we have to have a way to compare students and see who is doing well.

I don't care about comparing that. We have SATs etc for colleges; such tests are enough.

The best judges of learning are the local people responsible for the kids. Curriculums were stronger and resulted in better educated students overall before the Feds ruined things.

Like I said, states can do it. But we have to have something to show what kids are learning. We need some metrics to measure the progress.

Why do "we" have to have any such things. Local school systems pay teachers, principles, and administrators...along with school boards to provide and manage the educational process. If we don't trust them to be honest about kids being proficient enough to pass a class and graduate, some do-gooder know-knowing bureaucrat is not going to "fix" things with a rigged standardized test which is so watered down and politicized that it MEANS NOTHING.

Let's look at the evidence: the more the Feds have taken control, the more functional illiterates are being graduated.

Nuff said.

 

[Unkotare]

democrats understand dependency. They count on it; always have.

Funny chit. Democrats realize that an advanced society takes care of their poor , sick & elderly.

...

“Take care of” = keeps them poor, sick and dependent, in the democrat book of control at all costs.

 

[Unkotare]

What does that mean? I've had some good teachers and some bad ones, but I remember the great ones like my 7th Grade social Studies teacher, she was fantastic. If you have no incentive to perform, then you get shitty results. Which is why the school system sucks like it does. The unions control everything. teachers cant do anything without their approval. They cant innovate, they cant discipline, they cant do anything to make a subject fun and exciting.

I'm don't know about the union stuff affecting what a teacher can do in a classroom, but I do know all the geniuses at the dept. of education do everything they can to prevent teachers from teaching. Over a month a year, they force teachers to teach students to take a test that does nothing for college admissions.

Again, standardized testing is the only way to make sure people are being taught. I'm a big fan of it. The problem is whats in the test. It should be basic stuff, easy and then you can move on to more difficult things.We had a test in high school (my sr year we were doing the test but we didn't have to pass, but the classes afterward did) And man was it easy, I don't know how anyone could fail it......it was like a citizen ship test.......it's easy crap, how does anyone not know such basic things?

BALONEY!

The best way of making sure students are being taught is parental oversight and involvement.

Standardized tests are gamed; and all students end up being "taught" is how to pass a bogus test. That is not education.

I agree parent need to be involved, but how do you compare what people learn from city to city, state to state?
You need to have some kind of idea of where people are. Like I said, it should be very basic simple stuff. But we have to have a way to compare students and see who is doing well.

I don't care about comparing that. We have SATs etc for colleges; such tests are enough.

...

No, they’re not.

 

[boedicca]

I'm don't know about the union stuff affecting what a teacher can do in a classroom, but I do know all the geniuses at the dept. of education do everything they can to prevent teachers from teaching. Over a month a year, they force teachers to teach students to take a test that does nothing for college admissions.

Again, standardized testing is the only way to make sure people are being taught. I'm a big fan of it. The problem is whats in the test. It should be basic stuff, easy and then you can move on to more difficult things.We had a test in high school (my sr year we were doing the test but we didn't have to pass, but the classes afterward did) And man was it easy, I don't know how anyone could fail it......it was like a citizen ship test.......it's easy crap, how does anyone not know such basic things?

BALONEY!

The best way of making sure students are being taught is parental oversight and involvement.

Standardized tests are gamed; and all students end up being "taught" is how to pass a bogus test. That is not education.

I agree parent need to be involved, but how do you compare what people learn from city to city, state to state?
You need to have some kind of idea of where people are. Like I said, it should be very basic simple stuff. But we have to have a way to compare students and see who is doing well.

I don't care about comparing that. We have SATs etc for colleges; such tests are enough.

...

No, they’re not.

Think that if it gives you comfort. In RealityLand, more standardized tests = less real education.

 

[Unkotare]

Again, standardized testing is the only way to make sure people are being taught. I'm a big fan of it. The problem is whats in the test. It should be basic stuff, easy and then you can move on to more difficult things.We had a test in high school (my sr year we were doing the test but we didn't have to pass, but the classes afterward did) And man was it easy, I don't know how anyone could fail it......it was like a citizen ship test.......it's easy crap, how does anyone not know such basic things?

BALONEY!

The best way of making sure students are being taught is parental oversight and involvement.

Standardized tests are gamed; and all students end up being "taught" is how to pass a bogus test. That is not education.

I agree parent need to be involved, but how do you compare what people learn from city to city, state to state?
You need to have some kind of idea of where people are. Like I said, it should be very basic simple stuff. But we have to have a way to compare students and see who is doing well.

I don't care about comparing that. We have SATs etc for colleges; such tests are enough.

...

No, they’re not.

Think that if it gives you comfort. In RealityLand, more standardized tests = less real education.

You are wrong, but it’s not entirely your fault.

 

[boedicca]

BALONEY!

The best way of making sure students are being taught is parental oversight and involvement.

Standardized tests are gamed; and all students end up being "taught" is how to pass a bogus test. That is not education.

I agree parent need to be involved, but how do you compare what people learn from city to city, state to state?
You need to have some kind of idea of where people are. Like I said, it should be very basic simple stuff. But we have to have a way to compare students and see who is doing well.

I don't care about comparing that. We have SATs etc for colleges; such tests are enough.

...

No, they’re not.

Think that if it gives you comfort. In RealityLand, more standardized tests = less real education.

You are wrong, but it’s not entirely your fault.

I am quite copacetic with the accuracy of my assessment. Standardized tests have not improved education. And the most certainly have not resulted in a more informed and knowledgeable population.

 

[Unkotare]

I agree parent need to be involved, but how do you compare what people learn from city to city, state to state?
You need to have some kind of idea of where people are. Like I said, it should be very basic simple stuff. But we have to have a way to compare students and see who is doing well.

I don't care about comparing that. We have SATs etc for colleges; such tests are enough.

...

No, they’re not.

Think that if it gives you comfort. In RealityLand, more standardized tests = less real education.

You are wrong, but it’s not entirely your fault.

I am quite copacetic with the accuracy of my assessment. Standardized tests have not improved education. And the most certainly have not resulted in a more informed and knowledgeable population.

Do you feel that standardized test are preventing you from covering all the material you need to teach in your classes?

 

[Unkotare]

I agree parent need to be involved, but how do you compare what people learn from city to city, state to state?
You need to have some kind of idea of where people are. Like I said, it should be very basic simple stuff. But we have to have a way to compare students and see who is doing well.

I don't care about comparing that. We have SATs etc for colleges; such tests are enough.

...

No, they’re not.

Think that if it gives you comfort. In RealityLand, more standardized tests = less real education.

You are wrong, but it’s not entirely your fault.

I am quite copacetic with the accuracy of my assessment. Standardized tests have not improved education. And the most certainly have not resulted in a more informed and knowledgeable population.

Have you noticed that many of the countries with whom American students are unfavorably compared rely on very high stakes standardized tests in their educational systems? Have you noticed that?

 

[boedicca]

I don't care about comparing that. We have SATs etc for colleges; such tests are enough.

...

No, they’re not.

Think that if it gives you comfort. In RealityLand, more standardized tests = less real education.

You are wrong, but it’s not entirely your fault.

I am quite copacetic with the accuracy of my assessment. Standardized tests have not improved education. And the most certainly have not resulted in a more informed and knowledgeable population.

Have you noticed that many of the countries with whom American students are unfavorably compared rely on very high stakes standardized test in their educational systems? Have you noticed that?

They also actually teach REAL math, physics and other REAL science, reading and writing.

We don't do these well in the U.S. anymore.