OT: High school teacher calls it quits

[CA renter]

[quote=EconProf]CArenter: Are you sure about that? I’ve heard the opposite–that although they pay much less, private schools attract teachers that covet the smaller class sizes, more motivated students, involved parents, and a less unionized, government-controlled atmosphere. I’ve read of younger public school teachers moving to private schools for just these advantages.
Let’s hear from others. especially teachers and parents, on this subject.[/quote]

This is based on my experience as I went through the credential program, volunteer time, and teaching experience in a public school district. I’ve never heard anyone in the credential program say that they wanted to work in a private school. Everyone I’ve ever talked to wanted to work in the public school system because of the better pay, benefits, and relative stability/security usually found in the public sector.

As a student, I spent a number of years in private school, and the teachers there wanted to be there because students were better behaved and performed better, academically. It was a religious school, so some teachers wanted to be there for religious reasons, too. Still, we knew of a number of them who were trying to get experience so they could work in the public school system.

FWIW, private schools do not have to hire credentialed teachers, though the individual schools might require certain degrees or credentials.

Must private school teachers possess a valid California teaching credential?

No. EC Section 48222 specifies only that private school teachers be “…persons capable of teaching”. However, many private school teachers do possess current California teaching credentials. An NPS (defined in #10, above) that accepts public school students with individualized education programs must have appropriately qualified and credentialed staff.

http://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/ps/rq/psfaq.asp#a15

Public schools have to hire credentialed teachers (which is a two-year, post-graduate program in most California colleges and universities), or those who are in the final stages of getting credentialed, or those who are in internship programs with the school district (getting credentialed via the employing district, which tends to be a very, very small minority of teachers). There is a possible exception for those who have six or more years of teaching experience in a private school — which is why a number of private school teachers are there for the experience, as they can possibly bypass the credential program, and/or strengthen their resume so that they have a better chance of being hired at a public school.

I’ve never heard of a public school teacher who wanted to transfer to a private school — and I’ve known a lot of teachers. Not saying there aren’t a few of them out there; but, in general, most teachers prefer to work for a public school district.

[CA renter]

[quote=AN][quote=CA renter]
No, definitely not. In education, the public school districts are much more likely to have higher standards, and higher pay. A lot of teachers work at private schools just to get the experience needed/desired to be hired by a public school.

Agree with your sentiments regarding this story, flu. It’s sad, because a good math teacher who can really motivate students should be able to make a very comfortable living, IMHO.[/quote]
Agree, good teachers should get paid more comparable with other profession in total compensation. However, the bad teachers should get fired more easily, just like every other profession in the private sector. Not all teachers are good. We should reward the top performers and punish the poor performer. Not make their salary similar. Then what incentive is there to be the top performer?

10 years experienced teacher should be making around $120k. Just like a 10 years experienced Engineer with a Master degree. But at the same time, such teacher shouldn’t have pension or tenure either, just like a comparable Engineer.[/quote]

It’s a complicated issue, largely because public employment has a political component that doesn’t exist in the private sector. As a teacher, you’re subject to the changing winds of state and local politics, and public perception. People in the public sector — especially administrators — tend to have more “dictatorial” traits (for lack of a better word), and with every change in administration or in other, political positions, teachers have to deal with new dictates, opinions, and pedagogy.

For example, at one elementary school, one of the principals would walk down the hallway, listening to teachers to see if anyone was using phonics instruction. This principal felt strongly about the “whole language” approach, and would write-up anyone who was using phonics, even if it was just a component of their teaching. The next principal was just the opposite, and demanded that all teachers use phonics, instead. The teachers not only have to deal with these VERY opinionated administrators, they also have new materials, techniques, and mandates that come from the state or federal level.

Teachers tend to feel pretty strongly, themselves, about what to teach and how to teach. Some teachers have many decade’s worth of classroom experience, and have seen all these methods come in and out of vogue over the years. They know what works for their students, and many feel that they have to stand their ground in order to teach, as opposed to promoting someone’s political agenda (as is often the case when people from outside of the classroom try to change things).

As you can imagine, things can get pretty heated when teachers oppose administrators and/or politicians regarding these topics, and this is one of the reasons for tenure. You really have to understand the personalities involved in education. It’s like a collection of kingdoms, where everyone wants to tell those below them what to do. Teachers need to be able to fight back, if it’s in the students’ best interests. While a few bad apples might be protected, I think it’s still a better system than one where there is constant teacher turnover and low morale.

BTW, it’s not like teachers can’t be fired. I’ve personally seen it happen on a couple of occasions. It’s just that teachers, once tenured, cannot be fired without cause. Principals simply have to follow certain procedures in order to substantiate their reasons for firing someone. Personally, I think it’s a better system because the administrators cannot simply fill a school with people who agree with them. They might have political motivations — many public administrators want to move into politics. Teachers need to be able to withstand the ever-changing fads and trends of the day, so they can focus on teaching the students, instead.

As for higher pay…nice in theory, but will probably never happen. School districts are hurting even in the best of times. California’s #1 expenditure is education, and we all know the state’s finances probably aren’t going to recover in the near future. We’re stuck with over-crowded classrooms and under-paid teachers, at least for now.

[CA renter]

[quote=AN][quote=CA renter]
No, definitely not. In education, the public school districts are much more likely to have higher standards, and higher pay. A lot of teachers work at private schools just to get the experience needed/desired to be hired by a public school.

Agree with your sentiments regarding this story, flu. It’s sad, because a good math teacher who can really motivate students should be able to make a very comfortable living, IMHO.[/quote]
Agree, good teachers should get paid more comparable with other profession in total compensation. However, the bad teachers should get fired more easily, just like every other profession in the private sector. Not all teachers are good. We should reward the top performers and punish the poor performer. Not make their salary similar. Then what incentive is there to be the top performer?

10 years experienced teacher should be making around $120k. Just like a 10 years experienced Engineer with a Master degree. But at the same time, such teacher shouldn’t have pension or tenure either, just like a comparable Engineer.[/quote]

It’s a complicated issue, largely because public employment has a political component that doesn’t exist in the private sector. As a teacher, you’re subject to the changing winds of state and local politics, and public perception. People in the public sector — especially administrators — tend to have more “dictatorial” traits (for lack of a better word), and with every change in administration or in other, political positions, teachers have to deal with new dictates, opinions, and pedagogy.

For example, at one elementary school, one of the principals would walk down the hallway, listening to teachers to see if anyone was using phonics instruction. This principal felt strongly about the “whole language” approach, and would write-up anyone who was using phonics, even if it was just a component of their teaching. The next principal was just the opposite, and demanded that all teachers use phonics, instead. The teachers not only have to deal with these VERY opinionated administrators, they also have new materials, techniques, and mandates that come from the state or federal level.

Teachers tend to feel pretty strongly, themselves, about what to teach and how to teach. Some teachers have many decade’s worth of classroom experience, and have seen all these methods come in and out of vogue over the years. They know what works for their students, and many feel that they have to stand their ground in order to teach, as opposed to promoting someone’s political agenda (as is often the case when people from outside of the classroom try to change things).

As you can imagine, things can get pretty heated when teachers oppose administrators and/or politicians regarding these topics, and this is one of the reasons for tenure. You really have to understand the personalities involved in education. It’s like a collection of kingdoms, where everyone wants to tell those below them what to do. Teachers need to be able to fight back, if it’s in the students’ best interests. While a few bad apples might be protected, I think it’s still a better system than one where there is constant teacher turnover and low morale.

BTW, it’s not like teachers can’t be fired. I’ve personally seen it happen on a couple of occasions. It’s just that teachers, once tenured, cannot be fired without cause. Principals simply have to follow certain procedures in order to substantiate their reasons for firing someone. Personally, I think it’s a better system because the administrators cannot simply fill a school with people who agree with them. They might have political motivations — many public administrators want to move into politics. Teachers need to be able to withstand the ever-changing fads and trends of the day, so they can focus on teaching the students, instead.

As for higher pay…nice in theory, but will probably never happen. School districts are hurting even in the best of times. California’s #1 expenditure is education, and we all know the state’s finances probably aren’t going to recover in the near future. We’re stuck with over-crowded classrooms and under-paid teachers, at least for now.

[CA renter]

[quote=AN][quote=CA renter]
No, definitely not. In education, the public school districts are much more likely to have higher standards, and higher pay. A lot of teachers work at private schools just to get the experience needed/desired to be hired by a public school.

Agree with your sentiments regarding this story, flu. It’s sad, because a good math teacher who can really motivate students should be able to make a very comfortable living, IMHO.[/quote]
Agree, good teachers should get paid more comparable with other profession in total compensation. However, the bad teachers should get fired more easily, just like every other profession in the private sector. Not all teachers are good. We should reward the top performers and punish the poor performer. Not make their salary similar. Then what incentive is there to be the top performer?

10 years experienced teacher should be making around $120k. Just like a 10 years experienced Engineer with a Master degree. But at the same time, such teacher shouldn’t have pension or tenure either, just like a comparable Engineer.[/quote]

It’s a complicated issue, largely because public employment has a political component that doesn’t exist in the private sector. As a teacher, you’re subject to the changing winds of state and local politics, and public perception. People in the public sector — especially administrators — tend to have more “dictatorial” traits (for lack of a better word), and with every change in administration or in other, political positions, teachers have to deal with new dictates, opinions, and pedagogy.

For example, at one elementary school, one of the principals would walk down the hallway, listening to teachers to see if anyone was using phonics instruction. This principal felt strongly about the “whole language” approach, and would write-up anyone who was using phonics, even if it was just a component of their teaching. The next principal was just the opposite, and demanded that all teachers use phonics, instead. The teachers not only have to deal with these VERY opinionated administrators, they also have new materials, techniques, and mandates that come from the state or federal level.

Teachers tend to feel pretty strongly, themselves, about what to teach and how to teach. Some teachers have many decade’s worth of classroom experience, and have seen all these methods come in and out of vogue over the years. They know what works for their students, and many feel that they have to stand their ground in order to teach, as opposed to promoting someone’s political agenda (as is often the case when people from outside of the classroom try to change things).

As you can imagine, things can get pretty heated when teachers oppose administrators and/or politicians regarding these topics, and this is one of the reasons for tenure. You really have to understand the personalities involved in education. It’s like a collection of kingdoms, where everyone wants to tell those below them what to do. Teachers need to be able to fight back, if it’s in the students’ best interests. While a few bad apples might be protected, I think it’s still a better system than one where there is constant teacher turnover and low morale.

BTW, it’s not like teachers can’t be fired. I’ve personally seen it happen on a couple of occasions. It’s just that teachers, once tenured, cannot be fired without cause. Principals simply have to follow certain procedures in order to substantiate their reasons for firing someone. Personally, I think it’s a better system because the administrators cannot simply fill a school with people who agree with them. They might have political motivations — many public administrators want to move into politics. Teachers need to be able to withstand the ever-changing fads and trends of the day, so they can focus on teaching the students, instead.

As for higher pay…nice in theory, but will probably never happen. School districts are hurting even in the best of times. California’s #1 expenditure is education, and we all know the state’s finances probably aren’t going to recover in the near future. We’re stuck with over-crowded classrooms and under-paid teachers, at least for now.

[CA renter]

[quote=AN][quote=CA renter]
No, definitely not. In education, the public school districts are much more likely to have higher standards, and higher pay. A lot of teachers work at private schools just to get the experience needed/desired to be hired by a public school.

Agree with your sentiments regarding this story, flu. It’s sad, because a good math teacher who can really motivate students should be able to make a very comfortable living, IMHO.[/quote]
Agree, good teachers should get paid more comparable with other profession in total compensation. However, the bad teachers should get fired more easily, just like every other profession in the private sector. Not all teachers are good. We should reward the top performers and punish the poor performer. Not make their salary similar. Then what incentive is there to be the top performer?

10 years experienced teacher should be making around $120k. Just like a 10 years experienced Engineer with a Master degree. But at the same time, such teacher shouldn’t have pension or tenure either, just like a comparable Engineer.[/quote]

It’s a complicated issue, largely because public employment has a political component that doesn’t exist in the private sector. As a teacher, you’re subject to the changing winds of state and local politics, and public perception. People in the public sector — especially administrators — tend to have more “dictatorial” traits (for lack of a better word), and with every change in administration or in other, political positions, teachers have to deal with new dictates, opinions, and pedagogy.

For example, at one elementary school, one of the principals would walk down the hallway, listening to teachers to see if anyone was using phonics instruction. This principal felt strongly about the “whole language” approach, and would write-up anyone who was using phonics, even if it was just a component of their teaching. The next principal was just the opposite, and demanded that all teachers use phonics, instead. The teachers not only have to deal with these VERY opinionated administrators, they also have new materials, techniques, and mandates that come from the state or federal level.

Teachers tend to feel pretty strongly, themselves, about what to teach and how to teach. Some teachers have many decade’s worth of classroom experience, and have seen all these methods come in and out of vogue over the years. They know what works for their students, and many feel that they have to stand their ground in order to teach, as opposed to promoting someone’s political agenda (as is often the case when people from outside of the classroom try to change things).

As you can imagine, things can get pretty heated when teachers oppose administrators and/or politicians regarding these topics, and this is one of the reasons for tenure. You really have to understand the personalities involved in education. It’s like a collection of kingdoms, where everyone wants to tell those below them what to do. Teachers need to be able to fight back, if it’s in the students’ best interests. While a few bad apples might be protected, I think it’s still a better system than one where there is constant teacher turnover and low morale.

BTW, it’s not like teachers can’t be fired. I’ve personally seen it happen on a couple of occasions. It’s just that teachers, once tenured, cannot be fired without cause. Principals simply have to follow certain procedures in order to substantiate their reasons for firing someone. Personally, I think it’s a better system because the administrators cannot simply fill a school with people who agree with them. They might have political motivations — many public administrators want to move into politics. Teachers need to be able to withstand the ever-changing fads and trends of the day, so they can focus on teaching the students, instead.

As for higher pay…nice in theory, but will probably never happen. School districts are hurting even in the best of times. California’s #1 expenditure is education, and we all know the state’s finances probably aren’t going to recover in the near future. We’re stuck with over-crowded classrooms and under-paid teachers, at least for now.

[CA renter]

[quote=AN][quote=CA renter]
No, definitely not. In education, the public school districts are much more likely to have higher standards, and higher pay. A lot of teachers work at private schools just to get the experience needed/desired to be hired by a public school.

Agree with your sentiments regarding this story, flu. It’s sad, because a good math teacher who can really motivate students should be able to make a very comfortable living, IMHO.[/quote]
Agree, good teachers should get paid more comparable with other profession in total compensation. However, the bad teachers should get fired more easily, just like every other profession in the private sector. Not all teachers are good. We should reward the top performers and punish the poor performer. Not make their salary similar. Then what incentive is there to be the top performer?

10 years experienced teacher should be making around $120k. Just like a 10 years experienced Engineer with a Master degree. But at the same time, such teacher shouldn’t have pension or tenure either, just like a comparable Engineer.[/quote]

It’s a complicated issue, largely because public employment has a political component that doesn’t exist in the private sector. As a teacher, you’re subject to the changing winds of state and local politics, and public perception. People in the public sector — especially administrators — tend to have more “dictatorial” traits (for lack of a better word), and with every change in administration or in other, political positions, teachers have to deal with new dictates, opinions, and pedagogy.

For example, at one elementary school, one of the principals would walk down the hallway, listening to teachers to see if anyone was using phonics instruction. This principal felt strongly about the “whole language” approach, and would write-up anyone who was using phonics, even if it was just a component of their teaching. The next principal was just the opposite, and demanded that all teachers use phonics, instead. The teachers not only have to deal with these VERY opinionated administrators, they also have new materials, techniques, and mandates that come from the state or federal level.

Teachers tend to feel pretty strongly, themselves, about what to teach and how to teach. Some teachers have many decade’s worth of classroom experience, and have seen all these methods come in and out of vogue over the years. They know what works for their students, and many feel that they have to stand their ground in order to teach, as opposed to promoting someone’s political agenda (as is often the case when people from outside of the classroom try to change things).

As you can imagine, things can get pretty heated when teachers oppose administrators and/or politicians regarding these topics, and this is one of the reasons for tenure. You really have to understand the personalities involved in education. It’s like a collection of kingdoms, where everyone wants to tell those below them what to do. Teachers need to be able to fight back, if it’s in the students’ best interests. While a few bad apples might be protected, I think it’s still a better system than one where there is constant teacher turnover and low morale.

BTW, it’s not like teachers can’t be fired. I’ve personally seen it happen on a couple of occasions. It’s just that teachers, once tenured, cannot be fired without cause. Principals simply have to follow certain procedures in order to substantiate their reasons for firing someone. Personally, I think it’s a better system because the administrators cannot simply fill a school with people who agree with them. They might have political motivations — many public administrators want to move into politics. Teachers need to be able to withstand the ever-changing fads and trends of the day, so they can focus on teaching the students, instead.

As for higher pay…nice in theory, but will probably never happen. School districts are hurting even in the best of times. California’s #1 expenditure is education, and we all know the state’s finances probably aren’t going to recover in the near future. We’re stuck with over-crowded classrooms and under-paid teachers, at least for now.

[an]

[quote=CA renter]It’s a complicated issue, largely because public employment has a political component that doesn’t exist in the private sector. As a teacher, you’re subject to the changing winds of state and local politics, and public perception. People in the public sector — especially administrators — tend to have more “dictatorial” traits (for lack of a better word), and with every change in administration or in other, political positions, teachers have to deal with new dictates, opinions, and pedagogy.[/quote]
Private corporation have similar environment. The public determine whether your product is desirable or not and you will have to change your projects to meet market demands. There are corporate politics, not that dissimilar to public politics.

[quote=CA renter]For example, at one elementary school, one of the principals would walk down the hallway, listening to teachers to see if anyone was using phonics instruction. This principal felt strongly about the “whole language” approach, and would write-up anyone who was using phonics, even if it was just a component of their teaching. The next principal was just the opposite, and demanded that all teachers use phonics, instead. The teachers not only have to deal with these VERY opinionated administrators, they also have new materials, techniques, and mandates that come from the state or federal level.

Teachers tend to feel pretty strongly, themselves, about what to teach and how to teach. Some teachers have many decade’s worth of classroom experience, and have seen all these methods come in and out of vogue over the years. They know what works for their students, and many feel that they have to stand their ground in order to teach, as opposed to promoting someone’s political agenda (as is often the case when people from outside of the classroom try to change things).

As you can imagine, things can get pretty heated when teachers oppose administrators and/or politicians regarding these topics, and this is one of the reasons for tenure. You really have to understand the personalities involved in education. It’s like a collection of kingdoms, where everyone wants to tell those below them what to do. Teachers need to be able to fight back, if it’s in the students’ best interests. While a few bad apples might be protected, I think it’s still a better system than one where there is constant teacher turnover and low morale.[/quote]
How is this any different from private companies? Especially publicly traded companies where CEO changes probably just as often if not more than principals. Some CEO might want to micromanage while other give their troops more free reign. Some CEO might want to enforce a certain type of developmental style while others have a different style and if you have a change of the guards, you’ll get the same type of problem you just specified above. Yet, not every company have high turnover and low morale. Some are the totally opposite. For that matter, what’s your definition of high turn over? If the school have too high of a turnover rate, good teachers will not want to work there. If we have a voucher system and parents get to decide where to send their kids, then parents will pull their kids out of that school. Which will force the school to change to keep the good teachers happy. You seem to give parents way too little credit.

[quote=CA renter]BTW, it’s not like teachers can’t be fired. I’ve personally seen it happen on a couple of occasions. It’s just that teachers, once tenured, cannot be fired without cause. Principals simply have to follow certain procedures in order to substantiate their reasons for firing someone. Personally, I think it’s a better system because the administrators cannot simply fill a school with people who agree with them. They might have political motivations — many public administrators want to move into politics. Teachers need to be able to withstand the ever-changing fads and trends of the day, so they can focus on teaching the students, instead.[/quote]
If it’s really that easy to fire teachers, then why is there a need for the rubber room? Every documentaries and articles/blogs I’ve seen/read regarding schools mentioned how hard it is to fire teacher. Some interview teachers in the rubber rooms while other give students cameras to record the bad teachers they have. Some try to prove that some teachers gets lazier after they get tenure. Here are some links: http://thinkfree.freedomblogging.com/2009/05/05/34-things-that-will-get-a-teacher-fired/975/
http://www.teachersunionexposed.com/protecting.cfm
There are many others, just Google “how hard is it to fire a teacher”. If you try to search this same thing for different profession, you don’t get the same results.

[quote=CA renter]As for higher pay…nice in theory, but will probably never happen. School districts are hurting even in the best of times. California’s #1 expenditure is education, and we all know the state’s finances probably aren’t going to recover in the near future. We’re stuck with over-crowded classrooms and under-paid teachers, at least for now.[/quote]SDUSD is spending more per pupil than I am on my son’s private school. Yet, the class size for my son’s private school is MUCH smaller. So, we’re definitely not getting our money’s worth with public school. Especially when public school supposed to have the better purchasing power due to size and many of the administrative jobs can be shared between schools to reduce cost. So, there’s waste somewhere.

[an]

[quote=CA renter]It’s a complicated issue, largely because public employment has a political component that doesn’t exist in the private sector. As a teacher, you’re subject to the changing winds of state and local politics, and public perception. People in the public sector — especially administrators — tend to have more “dictatorial” traits (for lack of a better word), and with every change in administration or in other, political positions, teachers have to deal with new dictates, opinions, and pedagogy.[/quote]
Private corporation have similar environment. The public determine whether your product is desirable or not and you will have to change your projects to meet market demands. There are corporate politics, not that dissimilar to public politics.

[quote=CA renter]For example, at one elementary school, one of the principals would walk down the hallway, listening to teachers to see if anyone was using phonics instruction. This principal felt strongly about the “whole language” approach, and would write-up anyone who was using phonics, even if it was just a component of their teaching. The next principal was just the opposite, and demanded that all teachers use phonics, instead. The teachers not only have to deal with these VERY opinionated administrators, they also have new materials, techniques, and mandates that come from the state or federal level.

Teachers tend to feel pretty strongly, themselves, about what to teach and how to teach. Some teachers have many decade’s worth of classroom experience, and have seen all these methods come in and out of vogue over the years. They know what works for their students, and many feel that they have to stand their ground in order to teach, as opposed to promoting someone’s political agenda (as is often the case when people from outside of the classroom try to change things).

As you can imagine, things can get pretty heated when teachers oppose administrators and/or politicians regarding these topics, and this is one of the reasons for tenure. You really have to understand the personalities involved in education. It’s like a collection of kingdoms, where everyone wants to tell those below them what to do. Teachers need to be able to fight back, if it’s in the students’ best interests. While a few bad apples might be protected, I think it’s still a better system than one where there is constant teacher turnover and low morale.[/quote]
How is this any different from private companies? Especially publicly traded companies where CEO changes probably just as often if not more than principals. Some CEO might want to micromanage while other give their troops more free reign. Some CEO might want to enforce a certain type of developmental style while others have a different style and if you have a change of the guards, you’ll get the same type of problem you just specified above. Yet, not every company have high turnover and low morale. Some are the totally opposite. For that matter, what’s your definition of high turn over? If the school have too high of a turnover rate, good teachers will not want to work there. If we have a voucher system and parents get to decide where to send their kids, then parents will pull their kids out of that school. Which will force the school to change to keep the good teachers happy. You seem to give parents way too little credit.

[quote=CA renter]BTW, it’s not like teachers can’t be fired. I’ve personally seen it happen on a couple of occasions. It’s just that teachers, once tenured, cannot be fired without cause. Principals simply have to follow certain procedures in order to substantiate their reasons for firing someone. Personally, I think it’s a better system because the administrators cannot simply fill a school with people who agree with them. They might have political motivations — many public administrators want to move into politics. Teachers need to be able to withstand the ever-changing fads and trends of the day, so they can focus on teaching the students, instead.[/quote]
If it’s really that easy to fire teachers, then why is there a need for the rubber room? Every documentaries and articles/blogs I’ve seen/read regarding schools mentioned how hard it is to fire teacher. Some interview teachers in the rubber rooms while other give students cameras to record the bad teachers they have. Some try to prove that some teachers gets lazier after they get tenure. Here are some links: http://thinkfree.freedomblogging.com/2009/05/05/34-things-that-will-get-a-teacher-fired/975/
http://www.teachersunionexposed.com/protecting.cfm
There are many others, just Google “how hard is it to fire a teacher”. If you try to search this same thing for different profession, you don’t get the same results.

[quote=CA renter]As for higher pay…nice in theory, but will probably never happen. School districts are hurting even in the best of times. California’s #1 expenditure is education, and we all know the state’s finances probably aren’t going to recover in the near future. We’re stuck with over-crowded classrooms and under-paid teachers, at least for now.[/quote]SDUSD is spending more per pupil than I am on my son’s private school. Yet, the class size for my son’s private school is MUCH smaller. So, we’re definitely not getting our money’s worth with public school. Especially when public school supposed to have the better purchasing power due to size and many of the administrative jobs can be shared between schools to reduce cost. So, there’s waste somewhere.

[an]

[quote=CA renter]It’s a complicated issue, largely because public employment has a political component that doesn’t exist in the private sector. As a teacher, you’re subject to the changing winds of state and local politics, and public perception. People in the public sector — especially administrators — tend to have more “dictatorial” traits (for lack of a better word), and with every change in administration or in other, political positions, teachers have to deal with new dictates, opinions, and pedagogy.[/quote]
Private corporation have similar environment. The public determine whether your product is desirable or not and you will have to change your projects to meet market demands. There are corporate politics, not that dissimilar to public politics.

[quote=CA renter]For example, at one elementary school, one of the principals would walk down the hallway, listening to teachers to see if anyone was using phonics instruction. This principal felt strongly about the “whole language” approach, and would write-up anyone who was using phonics, even if it was just a component of their teaching. The next principal was just the opposite, and demanded that all teachers use phonics, instead. The teachers not only have to deal with these VERY opinionated administrators, they also have new materials, techniques, and mandates that come from the state or federal level.

Teachers tend to feel pretty strongly, themselves, about what to teach and how to teach. Some teachers have many decade’s worth of classroom experience, and have seen all these methods come in and out of vogue over the years. They know what works for their students, and many feel that they have to stand their ground in order to teach, as opposed to promoting someone’s political agenda (as is often the case when people from outside of the classroom try to change things).

As you can imagine, things can get pretty heated when teachers oppose administrators and/or politicians regarding these topics, and this is one of the reasons for tenure. You really have to understand the personalities involved in education. It’s like a collection of kingdoms, where everyone wants to tell those below them what to do. Teachers need to be able to fight back, if it’s in the students’ best interests. While a few bad apples might be protected, I think it’s still a better system than one where there is constant teacher turnover and low morale.[/quote]
How is this any different from private companies? Especially publicly traded companies where CEO changes probably just as often if not more than principals. Some CEO might want to micromanage while other give their troops more free reign. Some CEO might want to enforce a certain type of developmental style while others have a different style and if you have a change of the guards, you’ll get the same type of problem you just specified above. Yet, not every company have high turnover and low morale. Some are the totally opposite. For that matter, what’s your definition of high turn over? If the school have too high of a turnover rate, good teachers will not want to work there. If we have a voucher system and parents get to decide where to send their kids, then parents will pull their kids out of that school. Which will force the school to change to keep the good teachers happy. You seem to give parents way too little credit.

[quote=CA renter]BTW, it’s not like teachers can’t be fired. I’ve personally seen it happen on a couple of occasions. It’s just that teachers, once tenured, cannot be fired without cause. Principals simply have to follow certain procedures in order to substantiate their reasons for firing someone. Personally, I think it’s a better system because the administrators cannot simply fill a school with people who agree with them. They might have political motivations — many public administrators want to move into politics. Teachers need to be able to withstand the ever-changing fads and trends of the day, so they can focus on teaching the students, instead.[/quote]
If it’s really that easy to fire teachers, then why is there a need for the rubber room? Every documentaries and articles/blogs I’ve seen/read regarding schools mentioned how hard it is to fire teacher. Some interview teachers in the rubber rooms while other give students cameras to record the bad teachers they have. Some try to prove that some teachers gets lazier after they get tenure. Here are some links: http://thinkfree.freedomblogging.com/2009/05/05/34-things-that-will-get-a-teacher-fired/975/
http://www.teachersunionexposed.com/protecting.cfm
There are many others, just Google “how hard is it to fire a teacher”. If you try to search this same thing for different profession, you don’t get the same results.

[quote=CA renter]As for higher pay…nice in theory, but will probably never happen. School districts are hurting even in the best of times. California’s #1 expenditure is education, and we all know the state’s finances probably aren’t going to recover in the near future. We’re stuck with over-crowded classrooms and under-paid teachers, at least for now.[/quote]SDUSD is spending more per pupil than I am on my son’s private school. Yet, the class size for my son’s private school is MUCH smaller. So, we’re definitely not getting our money’s worth with public school. Especially when public school supposed to have the better purchasing power due to size and many of the administrative jobs can be shared between schools to reduce cost. So, there’s waste somewhere.

[an]

[quote=CA renter]It’s a complicated issue, largely because public employment has a political component that doesn’t exist in the private sector. As a teacher, you’re subject to the changing winds of state and local politics, and public perception. People in the public sector — especially administrators — tend to have more “dictatorial” traits (for lack of a better word), and with every change in administration or in other, political positions, teachers have to deal with new dictates, opinions, and pedagogy.[/quote]
Private corporation have similar environment. The public determine whether your product is desirable or not and you will have to change your projects to meet market demands. There are corporate politics, not that dissimilar to public politics.

[quote=CA renter]For example, at one elementary school, one of the principals would walk down the hallway, listening to teachers to see if anyone was using phonics instruction. This principal felt strongly about the “whole language” approach, and would write-up anyone who was using phonics, even if it was just a component of their teaching. The next principal was just the opposite, and demanded that all teachers use phonics, instead. The teachers not only have to deal with these VERY opinionated administrators, they also have new materials, techniques, and mandates that come from the state or federal level.

Teachers tend to feel pretty strongly, themselves, about what to teach and how to teach. Some teachers have many decade’s worth of classroom experience, and have seen all these methods come in and out of vogue over the years. They know what works for their students, and many feel that they have to stand their ground in order to teach, as opposed to promoting someone’s political agenda (as is often the case when people from outside of the classroom try to change things).

As you can imagine, things can get pretty heated when teachers oppose administrators and/or politicians regarding these topics, and this is one of the reasons for tenure. You really have to understand the personalities involved in education. It’s like a collection of kingdoms, where everyone wants to tell those below them what to do. Teachers need to be able to fight back, if it’s in the students’ best interests. While a few bad apples might be protected, I think it’s still a better system than one where there is constant teacher turnover and low morale.[/quote]
How is this any different from private companies? Especially publicly traded companies where CEO changes probably just as often if not more than principals. Some CEO might want to micromanage while other give their troops more free reign. Some CEO might want to enforce a certain type of developmental style while others have a different style and if you have a change of the guards, you’ll get the same type of problem you just specified above. Yet, not every company have high turnover and low morale. Some are the totally opposite. For that matter, what’s your definition of high turn over? If the school have too high of a turnover rate, good teachers will not want to work there. If we have a voucher system and parents get to decide where to send their kids, then parents will pull their kids out of that school. Which will force the school to change to keep the good teachers happy. You seem to give parents way too little credit.

[quote=CA renter]BTW, it’s not like teachers can’t be fired. I’ve personally seen it happen on a couple of occasions. It’s just that teachers, once tenured, cannot be fired without cause. Principals simply have to follow certain procedures in order to substantiate their reasons for firing someone. Personally, I think it’s a better system because the administrators cannot simply fill a school with people who agree with them. They might have political motivations — many public administrators want to move into politics. Teachers need to be able to withstand the ever-changing fads and trends of the day, so they can focus on teaching the students, instead.[/quote]
If it’s really that easy to fire teachers, then why is there a need for the rubber room? Every documentaries and articles/blogs I’ve seen/read regarding schools mentioned how hard it is to fire teacher. Some interview teachers in the rubber rooms while other give students cameras to record the bad teachers they have. Some try to prove that some teachers gets lazier after they get tenure. Here are some links: http://thinkfree.freedomblogging.com/2009/05/05/34-things-that-will-get-a-teacher-fired/975/
http://www.teachersunionexposed.com/protecting.cfm
There are many others, just Google “how hard is it to fire a teacher”. If you try to search this same thing for different profession, you don’t get the same results.

[quote=CA renter]As for higher pay…nice in theory, but will probably never happen. School districts are hurting even in the best of times. California’s #1 expenditure is education, and we all know the state’s finances probably aren’t going to recover in the near future. We’re stuck with over-crowded classrooms and under-paid teachers, at least for now.[/quote]SDUSD is spending more per pupil than I am on my son’s private school. Yet, the class size for my son’s private school is MUCH smaller. So, we’re definitely not getting our money’s worth with public school. Especially when public school supposed to have the better purchasing power due to size and many of the administrative jobs can be shared between schools to reduce cost. So, there’s waste somewhere.

[an]

[quote=CA renter]It’s a complicated issue, largely because public employment has a political component that doesn’t exist in the private sector. As a teacher, you’re subject to the changing winds of state and local politics, and public perception. People in the public sector — especially administrators — tend to have more “dictatorial” traits (for lack of a better word), and with every change in administration or in other, political positions, teachers have to deal with new dictates, opinions, and pedagogy.[/quote]
Private corporation have similar environment. The public determine whether your product is desirable or not and you will have to change your projects to meet market demands. There are corporate politics, not that dissimilar to public politics.

[quote=CA renter]For example, at one elementary school, one of the principals would walk down the hallway, listening to teachers to see if anyone was using phonics instruction. This principal felt strongly about the “whole language” approach, and would write-up anyone who was using phonics, even if it was just a component of their teaching. The next principal was just the opposite, and demanded that all teachers use phonics, instead. The teachers not only have to deal with these VERY opinionated administrators, they also have new materials, techniques, and mandates that come from the state or federal level.

Teachers tend to feel pretty strongly, themselves, about what to teach and how to teach. Some teachers have many decade’s worth of classroom experience, and have seen all these methods come in and out of vogue over the years. They know what works for their students, and many feel that they have to stand their ground in order to teach, as opposed to promoting someone’s political agenda (as is often the case when people from outside of the classroom try to change things).

As you can imagine, things can get pretty heated when teachers oppose administrators and/or politicians regarding these topics, and this is one of the reasons for tenure. You really have to understand the personalities involved in education. It’s like a collection of kingdoms, where everyone wants to tell those below them what to do. Teachers need to be able to fight back, if it’s in the students’ best interests. While a few bad apples might be protected, I think it’s still a better system than one where there is constant teacher turnover and low morale.[/quote]
How is this any different from private companies? Especially publicly traded companies where CEO changes probably just as often if not more than principals. Some CEO might want to micromanage while other give their troops more free reign. Some CEO might want to enforce a certain type of developmental style while others have a different style and if you have a change of the guards, you’ll get the same type of problem you just specified above. Yet, not every company have high turnover and low morale. Some are the totally opposite. For that matter, what’s your definition of high turn over? If the school have too high of a turnover rate, good teachers will not want to work there. If we have a voucher system and parents get to decide where to send their kids, then parents will pull their kids out of that school. Which will force the school to change to keep the good teachers happy. You seem to give parents way too little credit.

[quote=CA renter]BTW, it’s not like teachers can’t be fired. I’ve personally seen it happen on a couple of occasions. It’s just that teachers, once tenured, cannot be fired without cause. Principals simply have to follow certain procedures in order to substantiate their reasons for firing someone. Personally, I think it’s a better system because the administrators cannot simply fill a school with people who agree with them. They might have political motivations — many public administrators want to move into politics. Teachers need to be able to withstand the ever-changing fads and trends of the day, so they can focus on teaching the students, instead.[/quote]
If it’s really that easy to fire teachers, then why is there a need for the rubber room? Every documentaries and articles/blogs I’ve seen/read regarding schools mentioned how hard it is to fire teacher. Some interview teachers in the rubber rooms while other give students cameras to record the bad teachers they have. Some try to prove that some teachers gets lazier after they get tenure. Here are some links: http://thinkfree.freedomblogging.com/2009/05/05/34-things-that-will-get-a-teacher-fired/975/
http://www.teachersunionexposed.com/protecting.cfm
There are many others, just Google “how hard is it to fire a teacher”. If you try to search this same thing for different profession, you don’t get the same results.

[quote=CA renter]As for higher pay…nice in theory, but will probably never happen. School districts are hurting even in the best of times. California’s #1 expenditure is education, and we all know the state’s finances probably aren’t going to recover in the near future. We’re stuck with over-crowded classrooms and under-paid teachers, at least for now.[/quote]SDUSD is spending more per pupil than I am on my son’s private school. Yet, the class size for my son’s private school is MUCH smaller. So, we’re definitely not getting our money’s worth with public school. Especially when public school supposed to have the better purchasing power due to size and many of the administrative jobs can be shared between schools to reduce cost. So, there’s waste somewhere.

[an]

You’re right, public school teachers does get paid a lot more than private school teachers:

http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=55

yet, private school class size is smaller and private school on average tend to perform better than public school. With the advantage economy of scale for public school, we should be able to afford to pay more for public school and still spend the same per student and have similar class size. Yet, we’re not.

[an]

You’re right, public school teachers does get paid a lot more than private school teachers:

http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=55

yet, private school class size is smaller and private school on average tend to perform better than public school. With the advantage economy of scale for public school, we should be able to afford to pay more for public school and still spend the same per student and have similar class size. Yet, we’re not.

[an]

You’re right, public school teachers does get paid a lot more than private school teachers:

http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=55

yet, private school class size is smaller and private school on average tend to perform better than public school. With the advantage economy of scale for public school, we should be able to afford to pay more for public school and still spend the same per student and have similar class size. Yet, we’re not.

[an]

You’re right, public school teachers does get paid a lot more than private school teachers:

http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=55

yet, private school class size is smaller and private school on average tend to perform better than public school. With the advantage economy of scale for public school, we should be able to afford to pay more for public school and still spend the same per student and have similar class size. Yet, we’re not.

[Author]

Posts