|
Post by coachdbs on Jan 6, 2015 14:18:28 GMT -6
Agree with larrymoe. Does not have anything to do with popularity where I teach. It has everything to do with how difficult it is to get rid of bad teachers. Administrators are hesitant because it takes so long to get rid of someone and if the teacher is a member of the union, that administrator is going to be dealing with union legal representation.
I would also like to point out that most of the teachers I work with complain about a lot of things besides just leadership. However, most of them have never worked in the corporate world. Having worked in both situations, I just don't understand all the complaints. Teaching is the greatest job ever!!! It has numerous challenges but so does the corporate world!!! At least I have the opportunity to make a difference doing what I do now!
|
|
|
Post by larrymoe on Jan 6, 2015 16:10:27 GMT -6
Agree with larrymoe. Does not have anything to do with popularity where I teach. It has everything to do with how difficult it is to get rid of bad teachers. Administrators are hesitant because it takes so long to get rid of someone and if the teacher is a member of the union, that administrator is going to be dealing with union legal representation. I would also like to point out that most of the teachers I work with complain about a lot of things besides just leadership. However, most of them have never worked in the corporate world. Having worked in both situations, I just don't understand all the complaints. Teaching is the greatest job ever!!! It has numerous challenges but so does the corporate world!!! At least I have the opportunity to make a difference doing what I do now! I look at it through the lens of my dad's job. He hauls fuel to farmers all day long, usually 6 days a week. He's hauled over 2.75 million gallons of fuel in a year before. And it's all off the truck. Not a lot of semis, not a lot of big tanks that he just stands there and gets credit for. That's usually 500 and 1000 gallons at a time. He's probably one of the top 3 guys in his company, if not the best. Has been for about 25-30 years. The thing with his job is, yes there are some bosses that try to do some things that irritate him, but for the most part they let him do his job. He produces wonderfully for them and they let him go about doing that. They don't give him static, they just let him go. That doesn't happen in teaching. Even your most successful teacher with the best scores are told they're doing it wrong and need to change X,Y and Z. Usually by someone that doesn't know what X,Y and Z even are. One of the main reasons I'll never leave where I am now, at least as long as we have the leadership we have, is they leave me alone. They give me ideas of how to improve, but they're not telling me I need to become something I can never be, nor ever will be. That is very, very rare in today's world of education.
|
|
|
Post by coach2013 on Jan 6, 2015 16:42:44 GMT -6
If a school wants you out, they will find a way to get you gone or make your life miserable. No doubt about it. I would say that's true for any job. I stopped worrying about tenure and "security" some time back when I experienced a terrible set of administrators who did awful things to teachers they didn't like.
|
|
|
Post by jlenwood on Jan 6, 2015 17:53:21 GMT -6
I see this as one of the long term answers to the "bad" school issue. When a school begins to see that they have to compete for the student (tax dollar) they will improve. As the model is now, they just have to set back and get the tax money and do what they have always done. This in turn would take away from the individual concept of grading a teacher to grading their performance as an entire unit. So with this new model of school choice, if you start to see parents turning away from school district and turning to another one, the administration would be forced to find ways to improve and retain and gain students each year. If that meant getting rid of bad teachers, they would have to do it immediately or the system, due to the increased competition, would fail. This would put a premium on the "good teacher" being in demand....and getting paid! This would in fact create a supply and demand situation for the service of the school, and the ability of the teacher. The only thing about market based reforms like this is that the economics don't quite work out. Our state pays the same per student. That's true. I think it's around $9k. However, the quality of the facilities, money for teacher salaries, etc. at the individual schools mostly paid for by local taxes: property taxes, sales tax, wheel taxes, etc. More affluent communities have more money and thus better stuff to attract the best and brightest teachers, administrators, and students. They also know that they don't want to water down their resources by overextending themselves financially or bringing in "undesirable" student populations. It's not necessarily going to really improve schools if students can go wherever What you'd see would be an even more stratified system where kids who are good test takers go to the richer, more affluent schools to make them look even more awesome on paper, even if a lot of those results come from the students' natural abilities rather than the job of the school itself. Students who do poorly on tests will be stuck at the "bad" schools with less money and lower scores. Kids in the middle will slot in somewhere in between. It wouldn't improve education, it would just concentrate inequalities even further. You close the "bad" schools down in that situation and then those students just get shuffled to another "bad" school or turned away by better ones because they'd drag the test scores down there. Then the can of worms gets opened up to discrimination lawsuits because some groups do better on tests than others, etc. Education law is a huge mess in its own right... I guess I was thinking of what would happen in a "perfect world" scenario. I truly think the education system in this country is in deep trouble and, unfortunately I don't see a trend towards implementing so many of the common sense things you guys have brought up. No politician would ever have the balls to announce big time changes that would benefit students for fear of pi$$ing off a voter. It's funny, a friend of mine was elected to a school board position a year or so ago. She had all kinds of grand ideas, but after about 6 months she just said due to the feds, and state politics it is hard to do the right thing. We have some tremendous teachers in our school district full of pi$$ and vinegar, ready to do some great things...but after a while they kind of give up also. She says it is one of the most frustrating things she has ever been a part of, just for the reason of nothing can really change for the better.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jan 6, 2015 19:54:29 GMT -6
Schools have to change, and by change I mean real fundamental change. As of now, I have to send my kids to the school they are zoned to attend unless I sell my house and change addresses. Would you accept having to buy groceries from the building closest to you simply because it is in your neighborhood? Or gasoline? Or any other good or service? And what about the service that your school provides? If the closest service station only changed oil and rotated tires, would you accept that if you needed a transmission overhaul? What about doctors? Would you take you child to the local GP is they had Leukemia simply because their office was in your area and a oncologist was in the next town over? As a parent, I want the best for my child just like all you would. That is one reason I chose to work where I do. But what about parents that don't have the ability to do as I have done as make that choice? I see this as one of the long term answers to the "bad" school issue. When a school begins to see that they have to compete for the student (tax dollar) they will improve. As the model is now, they just have to set back and get the tax money and do what they have always done. This in turn would take away from the individual concept of grading a teacher to grading their performance as an entire unit. So with this new model of school choice, if you start to see parents turning away from school district and turning to another one, the administration would be forced to find ways to improve and retain and gain students each year. If that meant getting rid of bad teachers, they would have to do it immediately or the system, due to the increased competition, would fail. This would put a premium on the "good teacher" being in demand....and getting paid! This would in fact create a supply and demand situation for the service of the school, and the ability of the teacher. The fallacy in both of these lines of thought is that they imply that the "process" the schools are using is the source of its low status. I would say for the most part, this is simply not true. Low performing schools are generally schools attended by low achieving students, whose parents were low achieving, whose grandparents were low achieving..etc. etc. So the problem when you propose school choice, and school competition and the like is that "those kids" HAVE to go somewhere. And in the educational game, the deep dark secret is that the schools where those kids DON'T GO are going to score pretty well regardless of the educational processes implemented by admin and teachers, while the schools that enroll those students are going to be low performing regardless of the educational process in place. To use a football analogy: A team of players who don't really like football, who don't value football, who see football as something they just have to get through,who don't go to practice, who don't work hard when they DO go to practice, who don't lift in the offseason, who come from parents who didn't really like football, who don't stress football, who don't see a value in football, who don't care if their kids go to practice, who don't really care if they kids don't work hard at practice, who don't make the kids lift in offseason...is going to suck regardless of what "facemelter" offense the coach runs. That's what all of the "reforms" and "new programs" are in education. "Facemelters"
|
|
|
Post by jsk002 on Jan 6, 2015 19:57:39 GMT -6
We have had "Schools of Choice" (SOC) in our state for almost twenty years.
The result has been that city-urban districts are barely on life support. They have been eliminating positions, cutting salaries and benefits, closing schools at an alarming rate.
Isn't this the way free market competition is supposed to be? I mean as Coaches we let our kids compete and play the best. No different here.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2015 20:01:58 GMT -6
We have some counties around me that are school of choice and for athletics it's an absolute nightmare. We literally have kids play football at 1 school, basketball at another school then track at a third school (I sh!t you not)all in the same calendar school year. It's rampant b/c our athletic association does 0 to stop it.
Duece
|
|
|
Post by jsk002 on Jan 6, 2015 20:02:13 GMT -6
I see this as one of the long term answers to the "bad" school issue. When a school begins to see that they have to compete for the student (tax dollar) they will improve. As the model is now, they just have to set back and get the tax money and do what they have always done. This in turn would take away from the individual concept of grading a teacher to grading their performance as an entire unit. So with this new model of school choice, if you start to see parents turning away from school district and turning to another one, the administration would be forced to find ways to improve and retain and gain students each year. If that meant getting rid of bad teachers, they would have to do it immediately or the system, due to the increased competition, would fail. This would put a premium on the "good teacher" being in demand....and getting paid! This would in fact create a supply and demand situation for the service of the school, and the ability of the teacher. The fallacy in both of these lines of thought is that they imply that the "process" the schools are using is the source of its low status. I would say for the most part, this is simply not true. Low performing schools are generally schools attended by low achieving students, whose parents were low achieving, whose grandparents were low achieving..etc. etc. So the problem when you propose school choice, and school competition and the like is that "those kids" HAVE to go somewhere. And in the educational game, the deep dark secret is that the schools where those kids DON'T GO are going to score pretty well regardless of the educational processes implemented by admin and teachers, while the schools that enroll those students are going to be low performing regardless of the educational process in place. To use a football analogy: A team of players who don't really like football, who don't value football, who see football as something they just have to get through,who don't go to practice, who don't work hard when they DO go to practice, who don't lift in the offseason, who come from parents who didn't really like football, who don't stress football, who don't see a value in football, who don't care if their kids go to practice, who don't really care if they kids don't work hard at practice, who don't make the kids lift in offseason...is going to suck regardless of what "facemelter" offense the coach runs. That's what all of the "reforms" and "new programs" are in education. "Facemelters" This is a social problem though - the problem isn't with school choice it is with parents who don't care. For this reason I agree that student test scores aren't a good way to judge a teacher but that I think is a separate issue then choice schools.
|
|
|
Post by jsk002 on Jan 6, 2015 20:04:00 GMT -6
We have some counties around me that are school of choice and for athletics it's an absolute nightmare. We literally have kids play football at 1 school, basketball at another school then track at a third school (I sh!t you not)all in the same calendar school year. It's rampant b/c our athletic association does 0 to stop it. Duece In wisconsin you can't transfer after your freshmen year without sitting out. It is a good common sense rule
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2015 20:05:06 GMT -6
We have some counties around me that are school of choice and for athletics it's an absolute nightmare. We literally have kids play football at 1 school, basketball at another school then track at a third school (I sh!t you not)all in the same calendar school year. It's rampant b/c our athletic association does 0 to stop it. Duece In wisconsin you can't transfer after your freshmen year without sitting out. It is a good common sense rule I agree, but it appears common sense has been replaced by "_ it" here... Duece
|
|
|
Post by jsk002 on Jan 6, 2015 20:09:57 GMT -6
And yet I still see letters to the newspaper and stuff on Facebook about the "All-powerful Teachers' Union". I hear it all the time here in Virginia, where collective bargaining by public employees is illegal. In Wisconsin they have made teachers unions illegal. Tenure/experience doesn't mean anything in teaching anymore, nor does a masters degree. None of that will get you a raise in Wisconsin anymore or doesn't have to, administration can if they choose to, but don't have to. Personally I think they are trying to get rid of as much money in state education as they can and privatize it. There is too much money sitting there for private interests not to touch. This isn't true. State Unions are still legal in Wisconsin. They simply can't collectively bargain for wages and you don't have to pay dues if you don't want to. Certainly the unions now have much less power but they are still legal.
|
|
|
Post by jsk002 on Jan 6, 2015 20:10:21 GMT -6
In wisconsin you can't transfer after your freshmen year without sitting out. It is a good common sense rule I agree, but it appears common sense has been replaced by "_ it" here... Duece That sucks
|
|
|
Post by jlenwood on Jan 6, 2015 20:12:11 GMT -6
I see this as one of the long term answers to the "bad" school issue. When a school begins to see that they have to compete for the student (tax dollar) they will improve. As the model is now, they just have to set back and get the tax money and do what they have always done. This in turn would take away from the individual concept of grading a teacher to grading their performance as an entire unit. So with this new model of school choice, if you start to see parents turning away from school district and turning to another one, the administration would be forced to find ways to improve and retain and gain students each year. If that meant getting rid of bad teachers, they would have to do it immediately or the system, due to the increased competition, would fail. This would put a premium on the "good teacher" being in demand....and getting paid! This would in fact create a supply and demand situation for the service of the school, and the ability of the teacher. The fallacy in both of these lines of thought is that they imply that the "process" the schools are using is the source of its low status. I would say for the most part, this is simply not true. Low performing schools are generally schools attended by low achieving students, whose parents were low achieving, whose grandparents were low achieving..etc. etc. So the problem when you propose school choice, and school competition and the like is that "those kids" HAVE to go somewhere. And in the educational game, the deep dark secret is that the schools where those kids DON'T GO are going to score pretty well regardless of the educational processes implemented by admin and teachers, while the schools that enroll those students are going to be low performing regardless of the educational process in place. To use a football analogy: A team of players who don't really like football, who don't value football, who see football as something they just have to get through,who don't go to practice, who don't work hard when they DO go to practice, who don't lift in the offseason, who come from parents who didn't really like football, who don't stress football, who don't see a value in football, who don't care if their kids go to practice, who don't really care if they kids don't work hard at practice, who don't make the kids lift in offseason...is going to suck regardless of what "facemelter" offense the coach runs. That's what all of the "reforms" and "new programs" are in education. "Facemelters" I agree with what you are saying, as my post saying in a perfect world the free market system would be nice. However, whether that works or not, at some point some serious education reform in this country has to take place. If not, teaching will be like a lot of skilled trades are nowadays's-there are not enough young people getting in them to fill the needs of the workplace.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2015 20:35:55 GMT -6
I'm in SPED. This is an admin issue. This should not have been allowed based on what you state. We had the Principal and Asst. Superintendent sitting in and agreeing to everything the mother was demanding. With the mom's laywer and whoever the other woman was (both were typing up this whole thing onto laptops as it unfolded), they weren't about to push back. All this for a kid with a 504, not an IEP, though the mother started asking about an IEP when I left the meeting to return to class. The "no lower than an A because we're working on her self esteem" part really got me. Then again, the mom was describing a helpless space cadet who has no business in school. The kid I deal with in class is just an intelligent, quiet girl who loses her homework a lot and acts a little weird every now and then.
|
|
|
Post by blb on Jan 7, 2015 6:59:18 GMT -6
We have had "Schools of Choice" (SOC) in our state for almost twenty years.
The result has been that city-urban districts are barely on life support. They have been eliminating positions, cutting salaries and benefits, closing schools at an alarming rate.
Isn't this the way free market competition is supposed to be? I mean as Coaches we let our kids compete and play the best. No different here. Yes, the rich get richer, and if you're poor - must be your fault., so tough luck. And to the teachers in those schools who are being evaluated on students' test scores.
|
|
|
Post by tmccullo on Jan 7, 2015 7:52:08 GMT -6
Whatever people say negatively about being a teacher: Ill always remember that I wanted a big office desk, a big white board, a tv with dvd, cable tv, a projector and screen, a place to put up sports banners and a bulletin board for football articles, summers and weekends off, holidays off, short days and the ability to "do my thing" in the classroom. Ill gladly accept the headaches for the things I do love best about my job. I hear you Coach! Now that I am out of the classroom and doing what I always wanted to do I love my job too. I can put up with getting up at 4am and making a 42 mile drive to work. I had to be evaluated in the weight room this year and I got the best evaluation I have ever had. Too bad it took me a whole career to get there. Yes tenure and bad AP's.....a few bad AP's that hated men especially men football coaches have done all they can to me and I just don't care any more. I do my job and do it well and will keep doing that. Each year I get 5-6 offers to move on from other coaches. If things get bad, I will just pick up and take my show elsewhere. The closer I get to retirement the less I care about BS school issues.
|
|
|
Post by tigerpride on Jan 7, 2015 9:02:47 GMT -6
Teaching is a great profession and I chose the pay when I signed the contract. I will never b*tch about my paycheck. And we are NOT even close to overworked. And there are politics and headaches with most professions. Teachers need to quit their complaining.
My only gripe is this: the government and powers that be need to quit saving every kid and getting them college ready. We push kids along and try to make them college worthy and they are not even close. It is very frustrating to teach math to kids that cannot add or subtract, who have been passed along for years. It's killing me and expectations get lower and lower each year across the board. There are special needs and special education students that need life skills, not algebra 2. It's a freagin mess and IMO, forcing these kids to attempt to learn something they cannot is demoralizing and abusing. Some of these kids need to be bagging groceries and sweeping floors and serving food and stacking boxes and there is nothing wrong with that.
|
|
|
Post by tothehouse on Jan 7, 2015 9:30:35 GMT -6
One administrator told me that it takes about 3 years to get rid of a teacher...and it's never pretty. Therefore, the admin needs to decide which battle they want to fight. And they usually pick the road most traveled. Meaning...doing nothing.
|
|
|
Post by jml on Jan 7, 2015 10:50:33 GMT -6
Figures it would be too good to be true.... Basically have a better chance of winning a bronze medal in female gymnastics... Do you know what the certification process is in Canada versus the US?
|
|
|
Post by natenator on Jan 7, 2015 11:06:39 GMT -6
Figures it would be too good to be true.... Basically have a better chance of winning a bronze medal in female gymnastics... Do you know what the certification process is in Canada versus the US? In Canada, each province differs but for the most part you need, at minimum, to: - Have completed a minimum three-year postsecondary degree from an acceptable post-secondary institution
(University)
- Have successfully completed a one-year acceptable teacher education program
- Apply to the College for certification and pay the annual membership and registration fees. Application process includes providing proof of identity and a Canadian Criminal Record Check Report.
I don't really know the requirements in the US, sorry. FYI: I am not a teacher
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Jan 7, 2015 11:15:53 GMT -6
Teaching is a great profession and I chose the pay when I signed the contract. I will never b*tch about my paycheck. And we are NOT even close to overworked. And there are politics and headaches with most professions. Teachers need to quit their complaining. Everybody complains about their job. Doctors, lawyers, plumbers, and truck drivers-we all gripe. If you don't think that coaches gripe then keep reading the board.
|
|
|
Post by jsk002 on Jan 7, 2015 12:20:11 GMT -6
Isn't this the way free market competition is supposed to be? I mean as Coaches we let our kids compete and play the best. No different here. Yes, the rich get richer, and if you're poor - must be your fault., so tough luck. And to the teachers in those schools who are being evaluated on students' test scores. Maybe I am naive but school choice I think gives more kids regardless of income opportunity. Also - I don't think evaluating teachers on test scores is a good idea.
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Jan 7, 2015 12:35:09 GMT -6
Yes, the rich get richer, and if you're poor - must be your fault., so tough luck. And to the teachers in those schools who are being evaluated on students' test scores. Maybe I am naive but school choice I think gives more kids regardless of income opportunity. Also - I don't think evaluating teachers on test scores is a good idea. School choice sounds good but how do the poor kids get to those "better" schools. A coach at an inner city school recently told me that he has one kid on his team whose family has a car. You may not like evaluating by test scores but that's how it'll be done.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jan 7, 2015 13:18:38 GMT -6
Maybe I am naive but school choice I think gives more kids regardless of income opportunity. Also - I don't think evaluating teachers on test scores is a good idea. School choice sounds good but how do the poor kids get to those "better" schools. A coach at an inner city school recently told me that he has one kid on his team whose family has a car. And probably even more salient for this discussion (but the "dark secret" of education") is the fact that once those poor kids got to the "better schools", they wouldn't be "better schools" anymore.
|
|
|
Post by larrymoe on Jan 7, 2015 13:41:06 GMT -6
We have some counties around me that are school of choice and for athletics it's an absolute nightmare. We literally have kids play football at 1 school, basketball at another school then track at a third school (I sh!t you not)all in the same calendar school year. It's rampant b/c our athletic association does 0 to stop it. Duece In wisconsin you can't transfer after your freshmen year without sitting out. It is a good common sense rule So, if your family moves after your freshmen year you can't play sports for the next 3 years? That's asinine.
|
|
|
Post by larrymoe on Jan 7, 2015 13:44:46 GMT -6
Teaching is a great profession and I chose the pay when I signed the contract. I will never b*tch about my paycheck. And we are NOT even close to overworked. And there are politics and headaches with most professions. Teachers need to quit their complaining. My only gripe is this: the government and powers that be need to quit saving every kid and getting them college ready. We push kids along and try to make them college worthy and they are not even close. It is very frustrating to teach math to kids that cannot add or subtract, who have been passed along for years. It's killing me and expectations get lower and lower each year across the board. There are special needs and special education students that need life skills, not algebra 2. It's a freagin mess and IMO, forcing these kids to attempt to learn something they cannot is demoralizing and abusing. Some of these kids need to be bagging groceries and sweeping floors and serving food and stacking boxes and there is nothing wrong with that. They have to push every kid toward college and keep pumping college educated jobs because if they didn't, they'd have to explain how they've allowed the manufacturing base that doesn't require a college degree to erode over the past 40 years and how they've profited off it.
|
|
|
Post by larrymoe on Jan 7, 2015 13:48:28 GMT -6
Maybe I am naive but school choice I think gives more kids regardless of income opportunity. Also - I don't think evaluating teachers on test scores is a good idea. They have opportunity at those "bad" schools. It's not like there isn't people there that try or want to teach. They just ignore it. I've worked at a "bad" school once and the teachers there busted their asses to educate those kids. Those kids just flat didn't give a crap. As long as they got their check they didn't give two craps about "opportunity".
|
|
|
Post by rsmith627 on Jan 7, 2015 14:21:07 GMT -6
In wisconsin you can't transfer after your freshmen year without sitting out. It is a good common sense rule So, if your family moves after your freshmen year you can't play sports for the next 3 years? That's asinine. You probably only have to sit a year. That's how it is in utah anyway. People still find ways to work around it.
|
|
|
Post by rsmith627 on Jan 7, 2015 14:40:17 GMT -6
I too have worked in a "bad" school. At that school were some of the best teachers that I have ever had the privilege of working with. If a kid wanted to, they had every opportunity to break the trend and change their lives. The problem for most was that the gang mentality and "I'm too thug to do homework for your class, coach" was all most of those kids ever knew. The best feeling in the world was getting through to some of those kids. Now, I work in a "good" school that has pretty lousy teachers, but they look good because there is a much better product in the classroom. I am interested to see how this school evolves as our demographic is rapidly changing. Some of these teachers have no idea what they're in for.
|
|
hawkd
Sophomore Member
Posts: 202
|
Post by hawkd on Jan 7, 2015 14:42:17 GMT -6
One of the greatest things about me and my life is my lack of need for money. I'm not rich by any means but the 50K a year I get for teaching is plenty for me. That being said, I really have to thank my college advisor. I took math and science classes side by side throughout college not really knowing which one I wanted to teach. Both are equally easy for me. But when the time came where I had a class conflict my advisor said "if you always want a job, teach math" I followed his advice and here I am. I up and quit a teaching job to move 3 hours to coach football. I didn't have any leads on any potential jobs when I resigned, hadn't even sent out a resume. I just moved and figured something would come up and it did. The advice of my advisor has allowed me to say this to overzealous administrators "Look, I'm going to coach football and I'm going to teach math - it doesn't have to be here." I don't get all worked up over the evaluation system. I don't get all worked up over district policy or whatever other teachers are all fired up about...We have some kind of drama going on in our district right now about the Super and some other lady...apparently they are bad for the district or something, i don't know, I don't really pay attention because at the end of the day if they do something that I don't like, I'll just leave. I don't care about the years of experience and what pay step I'd be on. I make more than enough to support my football/whorin/drinkin habits and I can always find another teaching job so they really have no leverage on me at all. This is great! Damn near poetic. On another note regarding the online stuff, remember, any method can be made into a joke if its shortchanged or made into a hoop jumping thing. The ones that figure out how to tie in the online stuff to the physical brick house education will win. The online component will be huge. Just think of the difference it's made as football coaches between the ones that have embraced the 'net and those that haven't.
|
|