Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
CA renter
Participant[quote=livinincali]
I agree that how to teach is probably more important that what you teach. Seriously any college kid should be able to know the material that is learned in K-12 education. Can they effectively teach it is a different question?
The problem in my eyes is the public school district does a really bad job at utilizing resources. For example let’s talk about the all-star mensa teacher that does it for the love of the job. At a high school level maybe 150 kids can be exposed to that teacher per semester under the current system. Thousands of other kids are not exposed to that star performer and a couple thousand more are exposed to the bottom 10% performers.
So now we have this star teacher that is likely teaching kids that could learn the material from any average teacher getting the advantage of learning it from one of the best. How do you get that star teacher into more classrooms. Why aren’t school district adopting and using technology to make that happen. If you could accomplish that successfully, you could give the star teacher a big raise and replace a bunch of the ineffectively classroom teachers. If I could prove massive increases in student performance by going down this path it would be rejected unfortunately.
That’s the fundamental issue. Public education and especially the representing unions isn’t about how to do public education better it’s about how to protect teachers and administrator jobs.
Fortunately we are finally seeing some investment in a better way of teaching content, i.e. the Khan Adamedy’s of the world. It’s likely inevitable that eventually better teaching technologies will make it into the classroom and replace the average classroom teacher but it’s not going to happen peacefully. You’ll have lower costs aides managing the classroom, with content coming from star content providers. Those aides might get paid petty well and they’ll have to do less work (grading and lesson planing will be centralized). There will be challenges and obstacles to overcome. Some kids might do worse in a system like this but I think it’s eventually coming.[/quote]
The reason most good teachers are good is not because they have a better lecture. It’s because they know how to engage the students in the lessons and how to pique the students’ natural curiosity when it comes to learning. IMHO, this cannot be done through a screen (and my kids follow an online curriculum for much of their work…but I can acknowledge the faults, too).
There is nothing like an engaging debate or discussion in person. Nothing like a hands-on project. Electronic learning is good for certain things, but I highly doubt it will ever be able to replace a live teacher in a classroom.
Also, you’re underestimating how important classroom management is, especially if students are going to be working on their own. An aide will not be able to deal with all of the questions and situations that will arise in the classroom, especially if students are left to their own devices.
Participant[quote=Leorocky]The primary point in this discussion is this simple fact:
When a teacher needs to be let go for whatever reason its LIFO regardless of performance.
This is wrong. Every profession from teacher to CEO has poor performers. The crux of the lawsuit is that by protecting based on seniority, including the poor performers, you “damage” the kids. And not only do you impact one set of kids or one class, you expose decades of kids to the poor performers.
Is it unconstitutional? I have no idea. We do seem to subscribe to the concept of disparate impact in employment law, or at least our government does. This seems similar.
Some quick thoughts on some of the ancillary issues raised in this thread:
Are there “drama” Moms who try to usurp teachers? You betcha. The same type of person exists in the boardroom, the factory and every other type of workplace.
If it’s true that poor performing schools usually have the newer teachers that’s a clear example of the union ignoring the best interests of the kids. The “good” teachers should be assigned to the schools that need them the most.
Teachers don’t need job protection more so than any other profession. People who say things like “teachers will get fired just because…” have never worked in Management in the private sector. Sure it’d be nice to just be able to fire whoever you like, but reality is a complete 360. You have to get through HR and then the outside attorneys. Even layoffs these days are scrutinized for “disparate impact”, i.e. if you’re laying off 100 people and 75 are over 40 years old or female etc. you’re going to be told to go back to the drawing board.[/quote]
This is incorrect. You’re confusing layoffs with remedial action. The only time senior teachers are kept in favor of less senior teachers is when there are layoffs, usually due to budget cuts.
A teacher, irrespective of tenure status, can be terminated for cause; though it’s easier to fire a teacher before he/she reaches tenure status, and this is because they are being gauged to see if they are worthy of keeping when on probationary status. Tenure simply mandates due process when terminating a tenured teacher.
Additionally, I’ve worked in corporate management, and also in education. There is no comparison with regard to the need for additional protection for teachers. No private sector employee is scrutinized in the way that teachers are. Perhaps doctors or attorneys have the same type of liability, but they are insured against these events, and also have their own associations to protect them.
As scaredy said in another thread regarding not wanting to become a foster parent because of the liability, the same risks apply to teachers. They need protection more than most other professionals because they have highly emotional people who are constantly trying to tell them how to do their jobs, and these people (parents, administrators, politicians, etc.) are a fickle bunch who shift from one extreme to another over time…and expect teachers to do whatever they determine is the “in” thing at the moment…or else.
Participant[quote=SK in CV][quote=joec]
Taking a step back, in a school structure, is there really anyone who advocates for the student and children?[/quote]
Teachers do. Every single day. Relentlessly.[/quote]
Exactly.
Participant[quote=UCGal]I think we can all agree that some teachers are excellent – even life changing for their students. And that some teachers are suck-tastic. Driving the love of learning out of a student and making them hate school. This has nothing to do with tenure.
That said – experienced teachers tend to be better at classroom management (keeping control of the class and keeping them focused on learning.) This is because if they haven’t mastered classroom management by a few years in – they will be driven batty and be driven to quit, themselves.
I’d live to see ALL districts run a program like the Map tests. I know PUSD uses it – and San Diego unified does not. This is a test administered at the beginning of the year, and at the end of the year. It measures where a kid’s level is. And by comparing the end of the year to the beginning of the year you can tell if improvement was achieved.
This is important for kids who are not in the middle of the bell – you want your bright kids to improve – but they may be starting out ahead of their grade level… teaching them topics they already know won’t lead to improving… just stagnation. Conversely remedial students may be starting out behind grade level. It’s unreasonable to expect them to achieve the same end of year levels as someone who’s at grade level at the beginning of the year.
These tests could be used to show if a teacher is effective… Improvement for all kids assigned to that teacher.
It requires the teacher to differentiate more than the current system does… but that helps the students.
In SDUSD – there have been some high profile cases of principals being punished for taking on their bad teachers. Dr. O at Lincoln is a recent example. I’ve heard through the grapevine that the principal at CPMA middle might be in a similar situation.
Currently there is no recourse for principals to fire bad teachers in San Diego Unified. I don’t think it’s a union thing – I think it’s a structure thing in the district. I’d like to see teachers have a voice in any discipline – but I’d also like to see principals able to effectively run their schools.[/quote]
UCGal, I agree that we need to test for teacher accountability, but one of the greatest differences between a gifted vs non-gifted student is the ability to learn things quickly, and then to retain that information, and then to be able to apply that learning in a variety of ways and in different situations. Students in poor schools are less capable of this, generally, than students in the better-performing schools. This is because IQ is highly correlated with SES and both are highly correlated with how well a school performs. This is why “bad” schools tend to be concentrated in poor neighborhoods, and “good” schools tend to be concentrated in wealthier neighborhoods.
In addition to this, a class in a high-performing school will remain rather stable throughout the year, while a class in a low-performing school is much more likely to turn over. You can easily see up to half of a class leave by the end of the year in a lower-performing school because these families tend to be much more transient than families in high-SES areas.
Then, there is the issue of assistance at home. How do we account for the difference between the resources coming from home in the high-SES vs low-SES students and schools?
This is the problem with accountability. The issues are a lot more complex than most people think. It’s not a matter of teacher quality so much as it’s the demographics, SES, IQ, and parental support for the the students in the different groups.
ParticipantThat’s very impressive for such a young boy (or an adult)! What a great and healthy way to bond with your son. Good for you. 🙂
Participant[quote=FlyerInHi]it’s not even a sharp focus on resources access and acquisition. It’s more about megalomania. Like a real life chess game.
If it were just wealth accumulation, we’d be focused on commerce, trade, education and infrastructure — anything that creates more capital turnover and more productivity.
Vietnam was a disaster and did not get us an ounce of resource.
Iraq was worse than Vietnam. There was the promise of resources, but that never came. We would have been better off doing business with Saddam Hussein to develop oil fields and increase trade.[/quote]
It is ALWAYS about resources and the power we attain via control/ownership of those resources.
Participant[quote=scaredyclassic]A military coup. Maybe it’s already happened and we missed it.
just seems to me that if you’re suspicious enough about the gov to encourage heavy gun ownership, you’d be suspicious of the largest part of the govt, the military, and the possibility that they may be taking over, covertly or overtly, our nation’s wealth.
while it’s true that some men rob you with a fountain pen, and some men rob you with a gun, some men do actually rob with guns…maybe the military is not pure in heart.[/quote]
Agreed. And as someone who fully supports the right to own guns, I’m very wary about those who control our military. And, no, I don’t think that the people we elect are really the ones in control…even those whom we elect are pre-selected for us.
Participant[quote=scaredyclassic]I would probably drink less if I could get high on the weekends. I’d grow my own to save on cost.
not gonna happen with children around. maybe in retirement after it’s all legal?
something to look forward to in life. inda like the old coot in LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE?
rememebr that movie? it was hilarious[/quote]
Yeah, but he died in that movie. 🙁
ParticipantHappy Father’s Day to all the Pigg dads out there!
Enjoyed your stories, scaredy and Russ. 🙂
ParticipantParamount’s post is right on.
This is simply a way for the sellers of these items to charge a higher price via the magic of debt. Don’t do it.
Participant[quote=CA renter][quote=EconProf]Let’s step back from the minutia this thread has turned into and look at the larger issues this ruling points to. Much of the national and CA media have pointed out the shakeup this will have on public sector unions.
In essence, the court pointed out what has been obvious to the broader public for a long time: that what teachers’ unions advocate and practice hurts especially the poor and minority population, the very people liberals claim to want to help. The unions protect the adults at the expense of the children. The black and Hispanic parents who see their children trapped in failing schools have been clamoring for change. They cannot afford the private schools the rich liberals opt for, but favor vouchers, home-schooling, charter schools, lotteries to get into union-free schools–anything but their union-dominated local schools.
Now it will be interesting to witness the coming war within the democratic party. How will black and Hispanic politicians react to the rising tide of awareness among their own electorate of the harmful effects of liberalism. Some courageous democrats have already spoken up and broken from the status quo. More will be forced to in the future. This will be interesting to watch.[/quote]1. You like to make sweeping generalizations about many topics without providing ANY proof, evidence, data, statistics, studies, or logical reasoning of any sort. So, again, I will ask you: Where is your evidence that teachers’ unions negatively affect students?
2. As BG has already pointed out, these parents already have access to all of the resources you’ve noted, with the exception of vouchers (and there is NO evidence that vouchers would improve things, either).[/quote]
Still waiting…
Participant[quote=livinincali]
As for why I’m not a teacher or signing up for a job in those working conditions I don’t need to do that. I don’t have the patience to be a teacher and honestly I don’t think it would be the right kind of challenge to me. I think I’d be bored even if I was good at it and I don’t know that I would be good at it.The reality is that teachers don’t come from the best and the brightest. They come from the average History or English major in college that gets out and realizes that one of the best career paths is teaching. Some have a passion for it. Some are great. Many are good but nothing special. Some are frankly terrible. Just like the typical bell curve.
As for a Masters or Ph.D tell me how a Ph.D in education increases your ability to teacher 3rd grade math. Why do a lot of teachers have Masters degrees? Because they get paid more for having one and it’s a fairly easy to do if you’re already getting your education credential. It’s maybe 1 extra year in school and some sort of relatively short dissertation. Honestly a Masters in education from National University that you did in your spare time probably isn’t helping you teach 6th graders English. It does get you a raise though.
I’ll agree that one of the biggest problem is the extremely weak leadership of the administrators. Most administrators are former teachers that really don’t have any management skills. Yeah they think they know what they’re doing but they’d run a private company into the ground in no time. It’s kind of silly that the teachers that run from the classroom because they can’t handle managing the kids are put in positions of leadership in school districts but that’s what happens. Play politics, kiss ass, and get promoted not because you’re good at what you do but because you played the game right.
The whole thing is a failure, but we must protect the status quo at all costs.[/quote]
There is a bell curve in every profession. Some teachers are Mensa (or even Triple Nine Society) material, and some are of average intellect. Very few are below-average because they all have college degrees, and most districts do look at college records and GPAs.
As for the Masters or PhD, some teachers have an advanced degree in their core teaching subject, especially at the secondary level. Others might have an advanced degree in education, with many of them specializing in a particular niche like curriculum and instruction (specializing in a particular subject like reading or math), special education, neuroscience/cognitive studies (especially how it relates to the learning process), technology in the classroom, administration, or school counseling (for those who want to move up and out of the classroom), etc.
What many people don’t understand is that how to teach is every bit as important as what to teach. A teacher with a Masters or PhD has studied different teaching methods and learned about the best ways to reach different types of students in different settings and situations.
Participant[quote=Blogstar]http://sandiegobeerfestival.com/beer-competition/beer-styles[/quote]
Wow, so many varieties! We should have a competition to see who can drink the most samples. 🙂
Participant[quote=SK in CV][quote=CA renter]
FWIW, the good beers also don’t go through you like the cheap beers do. [/quote]
Umm….yes, they do. And because many craft beers have higher alcohol content than cheap beer, they go through you even faster. Alcohol is a diuretic. And that doesn’t matter whether the alcohol is in Pabst or in Arrogant Bastard. But if you drink less, you’ll pee less.[/quote]
Not the experience of my DH or myself…or the others with whom we’ve discussed this. But we can take a Pigg poll! 😉
-
AuthorPosts
