OT: High school teacher calls it quits

[UCGal]

I was a student in San Diego unified when the busing was going on. San Diego did NOT have forced busing. They were able to achieve their numbers with volunteer busing and magnet schools.

My junior high (before they called it a middle school) and high school had kids bused in.

There was some racial tension… but this was the 70’s – we students did a sit-in to get the administration to help deal with it. LOL. (I’ll admit – for many it was an excuse to ditch a class to do the sit-in.)

I don’t know of ANY parents that pulled their kids when the voluntary busing started. And UC was pretty affluent. Very few of my friends went to private school. One friend went to a magnet school – for the performing arts. This was before UC high and Standley middle – UC kids went to Marston and Clairemont.

There’s a reason magnet schools in San Diego unified are often in less desirable neighborhoods – it’s a way of drawing the white kids from the neighborhood schools to the more inner city neighorhoods – look at what used to be San Diego High (near downtown), south end of Balboa Park. It was a pretty poor performing school, very inner city in it’s demographics – now it’s a cluster of magnet schools – schools within the larger campus. And it draws from all over the district For the leadership school, the arts school, the business school, international studies. The demographics changed with the magnet programs.
http://www.sandi.net/20451072011457293/blank/browse.asp?a=383&BMDRN=2000&BCOB=0&c=66267

[an]

CAR,so in essence, you’re saying that because we have a bunch of low performing students, those who care or want to perform will have to deal with it. Instead of letting those who care to get the highest opportunity possible. Sounds awefilly like the fail logic of no child left behind to me. Which is neglecting those who actually careand spend way too much on those who don’t.

[an]

CAR,so in essence, you’re saying that because we have a bunch of low performing students, those who care or want to perform will have to deal with it. Instead of letting those who care to get the highest opportunity possible. Sounds awefilly like the fail logic of no child left behind to me. Which is neglecting those who actually careand spend way too much on those who don’t.

[an]

CAR,so in essence, you’re saying that because we have a bunch of low performing students, those who care or want to perform will have to deal with it. Instead of letting those who care to get the highest opportunity possible. Sounds awefilly like the fail logic of no child left behind to me. Which is neglecting those who actually careand spend way too much on those who don’t.

[an]

CAR,so in essence, you’re saying that because we have a bunch of low performing students, those who care or want to perform will have to deal with it. Instead of letting those who care to get the highest opportunity possible. Sounds awefilly like the fail logic of no child left behind to me. Which is neglecting those who actually careand spend way too much on those who don’t.

[an]

CAR,so in essence, you’re saying that because we have a bunch of low performing students, those who care or want to perform will have to deal with it. Instead of letting those who care to get the highest opportunity possible. Sounds awefilly like the fail logic of no child left behind to me. Which is neglecting those who actually careand spend way too much on those who don’t.

[jimmyle]

I agree with you that they should not have tenure and should have a 401k plan like most of us.

AN, are you in Engineering or have friends in Engineering? May be you are your friends work in a few selected fields like network (IT), database, or petroleum engineering where the pay are much higher than the average Engineering pay. Companies like Qualcom or Boeing may pay that much but the average Engineers don’t work for those companies. I believe the average pay is closer to 90-95k for a non manager Engineer with 10 yrs of experience.

[quote=AN]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]

[jimmyle]

I agree with you that they should not have tenure and should have a 401k plan like most of us.

AN, are you in Engineering or have friends in Engineering? May be you are your friends work in a few selected fields like network (IT), database, or petroleum engineering where the pay are much higher than the average Engineering pay. Companies like Qualcom or Boeing may pay that much but the average Engineers don’t work for those companies. I believe the average pay is closer to 90-95k for a non manager Engineer with 10 yrs of experience.

[quote=AN]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]

[jimmyle]

I agree with you that they should not have tenure and should have a 401k plan like most of us.

AN, are you in Engineering or have friends in Engineering? May be you are your friends work in a few selected fields like network (IT), database, or petroleum engineering where the pay are much higher than the average Engineering pay. Companies like Qualcom or Boeing may pay that much but the average Engineers don’t work for those companies. I believe the average pay is closer to 90-95k for a non manager Engineer with 10 yrs of experience.

[quote=AN]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]

[jimmyle]

I agree with you that they should not have tenure and should have a 401k plan like most of us.

AN, are you in Engineering or have friends in Engineering? May be you are your friends work in a few selected fields like network (IT), database, or petroleum engineering where the pay are much higher than the average Engineering pay. Companies like Qualcom or Boeing may pay that much but the average Engineers don’t work for those companies. I believe the average pay is closer to 90-95k for a non manager Engineer with 10 yrs of experience.

[quote=AN]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]

[jimmyle]

I agree with you that they should not have tenure and should have a 401k plan like most of us.

AN, are you in Engineering or have friends in Engineering? May be you are your friends work in a few selected fields like network (IT), database, or petroleum engineering where the pay are much higher than the average Engineering pay. Companies like Qualcom or Boeing may pay that much but the average Engineers don’t work for those companies. I believe the average pay is closer to 90-95k for a non manager Engineer with 10 yrs of experience.

[quote=AN]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]

[bearishgurl]

[quote=AN]CAR,so in essence, you’re saying that because we have a bunch of low performing students, those who care or want to perform will have to deal with it. Instead of letting those who care to get the highest opportunity possible. Sounds awefilly like the fail logic of no child left behind to me. Which is neglecting those who actually careand spend way too much on those who don’t.[/quote]

I’m not CAR but I just want to respond to this.

AN, those (parents) “who care” or (students) “who want to perform” ARE able to get the highest opportunity possible, in EVERY school! Because there might be Magnet, Choice or VEEP students attending a school outside of their attendance area, this in no way takes anything from local students who “want to perform.” I don’t think ANY teacher would consciously “neglect” any student in their classrooms. If students need extra help with a topic, all they have to do is ASK for it!

I think what CAR is referring to here is that SOME students (percentage varying and unknown in each school) don’t get a good breakfast or have their own bed at home (have to share, sleep on sofa or futon or sleep in a roomful of other people). This makes it hard for them to concentrate, especially in their morning classes, that is, if the free breakfast program is not available at their school and they have to wait until lunchtime to have their “free or subsidized” lunch. This “phenomenon” is really just a function of poverty, nothing more. I believe 95% of parents from ALL walks of life CARE about their children’s education. How else can you explain so many “low-income” parents hopping on the “No Child Left Behind” bandwagon and successfully “choicing” out of their neighborhood schools?

School choice is the law. And it takes NOTHING away from the students who already reside in the attendance areas of their choice. They have FIRST PRIORITY on attending that school!

[bearishgurl]

[quote=AN]CAR,so in essence, you’re saying that because we have a bunch of low performing students, those who care or want to perform will have to deal with it. Instead of letting those who care to get the highest opportunity possible. Sounds awefilly like the fail logic of no child left behind to me. Which is neglecting those who actually careand spend way too much on those who don’t.[/quote]

I’m not CAR but I just want to respond to this.

AN, those (parents) “who care” or (students) “who want to perform” ARE able to get the highest opportunity possible, in EVERY school! Because there might be Magnet, Choice or VEEP students attending a school outside of their attendance area, this in no way takes anything from local students who “want to perform.” I don’t think ANY teacher would consciously “neglect” any student in their classrooms. If students need extra help with a topic, all they have to do is ASK for it!

I think what CAR is referring to here is that SOME students (percentage varying and unknown in each school) don’t get a good breakfast or have their own bed at home (have to share, sleep on sofa or futon or sleep in a roomful of other people). This makes it hard for them to concentrate, especially in their morning classes, that is, if the free breakfast program is not available at their school and they have to wait until lunchtime to have their “free or subsidized” lunch. This “phenomenon” is really just a function of poverty, nothing more. I believe 95% of parents from ALL walks of life CARE about their children’s education. How else can you explain so many “low-income” parents hopping on the “No Child Left Behind” bandwagon and successfully “choicing” out of their neighborhood schools?

School choice is the law. And it takes NOTHING away from the students who already reside in the attendance areas of their choice. They have FIRST PRIORITY on attending that school!

[bearishgurl]

[quote=AN]CAR,so in essence, you’re saying that because we have a bunch of low performing students, those who care or want to perform will have to deal with it. Instead of letting those who care to get the highest opportunity possible. Sounds awefilly like the fail logic of no child left behind to me. Which is neglecting those who actually careand spend way too much on those who don’t.[/quote]

I’m not CAR but I just want to respond to this.

AN, those (parents) “who care” or (students) “who want to perform” ARE able to get the highest opportunity possible, in EVERY school! Because there might be Magnet, Choice or VEEP students attending a school outside of their attendance area, this in no way takes anything from local students who “want to perform.” I don’t think ANY teacher would consciously “neglect” any student in their classrooms. If students need extra help with a topic, all they have to do is ASK for it!

I think what CAR is referring to here is that SOME students (percentage varying and unknown in each school) don’t get a good breakfast or have their own bed at home (have to share, sleep on sofa or futon or sleep in a roomful of other people). This makes it hard for them to concentrate, especially in their morning classes, that is, if the free breakfast program is not available at their school and they have to wait until lunchtime to have their “free or subsidized” lunch. This “phenomenon” is really just a function of poverty, nothing more. I believe 95% of parents from ALL walks of life CARE about their children’s education. How else can you explain so many “low-income” parents hopping on the “No Child Left Behind” bandwagon and successfully “choicing” out of their neighborhood schools?

School choice is the law. And it takes NOTHING away from the students who already reside in the attendance areas of their choice. They have FIRST PRIORITY on attending that school!

[bearishgurl]

[quote=AN]CAR,so in essence, you’re saying that because we have a bunch of low performing students, those who care or want to perform will have to deal with it. Instead of letting those who care to get the highest opportunity possible. Sounds awefilly like the fail logic of no child left behind to me. Which is neglecting those who actually careand spend way too much on those who don’t.[/quote]

I’m not CAR but I just want to respond to this.

AN, those (parents) “who care” or (students) “who want to perform” ARE able to get the highest opportunity possible, in EVERY school! Because there might be Magnet, Choice or VEEP students attending a school outside of their attendance area, this in no way takes anything from local students who “want to perform.” I don’t think ANY teacher would consciously “neglect” any student in their classrooms. If students need extra help with a topic, all they have to do is ASK for it!

I think what CAR is referring to here is that SOME students (percentage varying and unknown in each school) don’t get a good breakfast or have their own bed at home (have to share, sleep on sofa or futon or sleep in a roomful of other people). This makes it hard for them to concentrate, especially in their morning classes, that is, if the free breakfast program is not available at their school and they have to wait until lunchtime to have their “free or subsidized” lunch. This “phenomenon” is really just a function of poverty, nothing more. I believe 95% of parents from ALL walks of life CARE about their children’s education. How else can you explain so many “low-income” parents hopping on the “No Child Left Behind” bandwagon and successfully “choicing” out of their neighborhood schools?

School choice is the law. And it takes NOTHING away from the students who already reside in the attendance areas of their choice. They have FIRST PRIORITY on attending that school!

[Author]

Posts