|
|
Post by 19delta on Mar 24, 2023 5:05:32 GMT -6
Our district is going through contract negotiations. The BOE and administration want us to give up the salary schedule for a different compensation system. To my knowledge, every time a school district has got rid of the salary schedule, the pressure to do that has always come from the BOE and the admin and not from the teachers. So, my questions is, why do BOEs and administrators generally oppose salary schedules while teacher unions support them?
|
|
|
|
Post by realdawg on Mar 24, 2023 5:23:39 GMT -6
I am from NC, so I have 0 experience with contract negotiations bc teachers unions dont exist here. The state government sets the pay scale in the budget and it is what they say it is. Your local BOE can choose to offer a local supplement and some do and some dont in varying amounts.
However, I would say it centers around performance based pay vs guaranteed pay for experienced teachers. The union wants to protect and guarantee the pay of veteran teachers while the schools want to pay them for performance.
I may be way off base here, but I know, that while it has never came close to passing, there have been several conversations in our state legislature about restructuring teacher pay that way.
|
|
|
|
Post by Defcord on Mar 24, 2023 6:10:41 GMT -6
It’s a terrible idea to do it if you have any choice in my experience. When I was in Indians our union advised to vote for performance pay which gave administration control over salary increases through evaluation measures and step pays were null. If you were effective or highly effective you got $2,000 performance payment but not salary increase.
So your salary would only go up with COLA raises. Unfortunately, that couldn’t be regularly scheduled and still needed board approval and was insufficient in regularly increasing teacher salaries.
On top of my bad experience we are in a major turn towards teacher shortages, which as a profession gives us the most negotiating power and leverage that we have had in years. I hope we take advantage of the position to improve retirement, work conditions and pay.
|
|
|
|
Post by MICoach on Mar 24, 2023 6:18:27 GMT -6
Sounds a lot like a red flag to me.
I've never heard of that happening, but my best guess is that the BOE/admin feel like they're paying too much in compensation and want a way to pay less.
They may frame it as wanted to move toward some sort of merit-based system for raises...which then makes me think they'll be looking for ways to rate people lower, so they then have to pay less in compensation.
As a teacher I love the salary schedule because it is predictable and reliable and (assuming my union bargains for some cost of living raises along the way) my real income rises every year. Teachers at districts with less competitive schedules or at charters (no union) may be stuck at the same nominal income for a number of years. I know teachers at the school I left five years ago (charter) haven't gotten any sizeable raise since then...with inflation they're functionally making less money now than they were five years ago.
I would think the reason why the BOE doesn't like it is they can get bogged down financially with big salaries if the district has a lot of teachers with advanced degrees and lots of years of experience...but as a teacher, I'd say that they should be valued higher exactly due to that experience and education.
|
|
|
|
Post by mariner42 on Mar 24, 2023 6:39:41 GMT -6
Our district is going through contract negotiations. The BOE and administration want us to give up the salary schedule for a different compensation system. To my knowledge, every time a school district has got rid of the salary schedule, the pressure to do that has always come from the BOE and the admin and not from the teachers. So, my questions is, why do BOEs and administrators generally oppose salary schedules while teacher unions support them? I don't see any way in which this doesn't end w/ people getting screwed over. There's too much nuance for performance-based pay as a teacher. Imagine if you got a class of kids in the weight room that had spent the last year playing video games and had no interest in weight training but didn't want to take normal PE because they hate running? How on earth could you possibly be evaluated fairly based off of that? Side note, I'm basically describing my 7th period this year and oh my are they awful. |
|
|
|
Post by mkuempel on Mar 24, 2023 7:36:59 GMT -6
It gives the local board "flexibility" to manage the budget rather than sticking to the current schedule, so if they need to spend more money that was previously allocated for teacher salaries in past years, they are able to do that, but I do not see any way in which less structure to the salary schedule will entice teachers to work there, seems like a way to tell teachers one thing in negotiations, but when the rubber meets the road, that money ends up somewhere else.
|
|
|
|
Post by blb on Mar 24, 2023 7:40:48 GMT -6
Would be even harder for poorly-performing districts (especially urban ones) to hire new teachers.
|
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Mar 24, 2023 14:37:46 GMT -6
I am from NC, so I have 0 experience with contract negotiations bc teachers unions dont exist here. The state government sets the pay scale in the budget and it is what they say it is. Your local BOE can choose to offer a local supplement and some do and some dont in varying amounts. However, I would say it centers around performance based pay vs guaranteed pay for experienced teachers. The union wants to protect and guarantee the pay of veteran teachers while the schools want to pay them for performance. I may be way off base here, but I know, that while it has never came close to passing, there have been several conversations in our state legislature about restructuring teacher pay that way. There's one right now. They're trying to avoid calling it merit pay but that's what it is. There are problems with merit pay: 1. Evaluation- There is no chance that admins can observe every teacher well enough to make a decision. Then they use stuff like portfolios- more work for teachers. And then it's still subjective so to be objective they have to go back to test scores. 2. Budgeting- Do they have enough money to pay every teacher who deserves a raise? If you think so you haven't done this long enough. They'll budget a certain number of Golden Tickets and that'll be it. 3. In the NC plan some advancement depends on taking on added responsibilities. That's not a raise, it's a promotion. Again, how many of those slots will be available? To me this is a scam to make it look like they're Doing Something but won't actually help teachers. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Mar 25, 2023 7:10:12 GMT -6
Our district is going through contract negotiations. The BOE and administration want us to give up the salary schedule for a different compensation system. To my knowledge, every time a school district has got rid of the salary schedule, the pressure to do that has always come from the BOE and the admin and not from the teachers. So, my questions is, why do BOEs and administrators generally oppose salary schedules while teacher unions support them? From a labor relations point of view, the reason unions push for scales is that it is the best way to compensate the lowest common denominator. It also maintains the cohesiveness of "the union". You saw some issues arise in the 2011 NFL collective bargaining negotiations (and a temporary dissolution of the NFLPA). Part of this was likely due to the difficulties of collective bargaining when some members make 10-15 times more than others. It is often stated that with 20/20 hindsight, the 2011 CBA was clearly more beneficial to management than labor. I would suggest that if the NFL compensation was set like most LEA salary scales, things might be different. Another factor, and this often upsets my education colleagues but I believe it is true, is that the best and brightest and most driven generally don't go into education. I don't believe it is an offensive statement to point out that you don't often find the national merit semi finalists, the valedictorians (especially male), tops in the class etc looking to a career teaching the rudimentary aspects of the revolutionary war, or basic algebra to 14 year olds. Compare a random sample of people at a new teacher orientation conference to a new associate training conference for Price Waterhouse Coopers or Mckinsey or BCG, or Med School or First year law associates. Just different people. Those people want the opportunity to claw to the top, and reap the rewards. Just not so in education. Even the very driven educators generally want to be the "best educator they can be". Those others I mentioned want to be "the best _______" with the accolades and compensation that comes with that. Salary scales work well for the education group...not so much for those set to climb the ladder. A third (and good reason) in my opinion that unions support a salary scale is that education is quite hard to evaluate. A few others have alluded to this in the thread. Unions (made of teachers) recognize the inherent folly that is trying to create a merit based compensation system on something like education. You get paid more than me because based on the luck of the draw you got the kid from a 2 parent college educated home and I got the kid who has been through 3 fosters in 8 months? No thank you. |
|
|
|
Post by mariner42 on Mar 25, 2023 7:28:42 GMT -6
For an additional example of why I think performance-based pay for teachers is problematic, here's a selection from an episode of Last Week Tonight that discusses it:
|
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Mar 25, 2023 10:09:00 GMT -6
As a football coach, I think it’s an interesting concept to potentially benefit us (In NC that is). If it is truly based on principals discretion, then they would be able to offer high pay levels (added title in the school house to get to the higher pay level).This would allow admins who are more concerned with sports a way to compensate beyond their peers who do not care about sports. In bigger districts where things are rigid pay wise, this could offer a new avenue (or a way for one school to entice a seemingly lateral move).
Would this play out like that? Who knows.
|
|
|
|
Post by Defcord on Mar 25, 2023 10:51:19 GMT -6
As a football coach, I think it’s an interesting concept to potentially benefit us (In NC that is). If it is truly based on principals discretion, then they would be able to offer high pay levels (added title in the school house to get to the higher pay level).This would allow admins who are more concerned with sports a way to compensate beyond their peers who do not care about sports. In bigger districts where things are rigid pay wise, this could offer a new avenue (or a way for one school to entice a seemingly lateral move). Would this play out like that? Who knows. There’s ways for schools to approve additional supplements and create positions already in most districts and states that I’ve worked in as a way to pay valuable members of staff. I would guess the merit based stuff has limited more salaries than it’s expanded. In theory it would be nice to be paid more than my peers on merit because I’m really good at my job so we do agree on that. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Mar 25, 2023 11:59:31 GMT -6
I will say this- I believe my particular district absolutely needs to reexamine the compensation structure. I personally think that those taking positions outside the classroom should not be paid the same or (worse) more than classroom teachers. These interventionists, specialists, "coaches" (not athletic but curriculum coaches or behavior coaches etc) should receive less than classroom teachers.
And from an impartial point of view (because it negatively would impact me) I think that various teaching positions need to be compensated differently as well. An Elementary art teacher who sees 10 30 minute classes a day should not be paid the same as a 1st grade teacher who is with those students at all times save for lunch or enrichment class (such as art). A HS librarian should not be paid the same as an elementary librarian who has the responsibility of running a classroom as well as book checkout.
I have decided that in the education world, they got things backwards. The NON classroom related parts of education need to be run much more like a business but get away from the business mindset when discussing classroom teachers and instruction. For example don't treat school A which is a 65 year old indoor/outdoor physical plant (meaning it is all not under one roof) landlocked in the middle of a neighborhood, has shifted from 45% free lunch to 93% free lunch in less than 15 years and has seen an enrollment increase of almost 45% in 10 years like School B which was built 6 years ago, is all indoors, has plenty of space etc. The non educationally related positions (HR, IT, Facilities, Media Relations/Communications etc. ) should be supervised with the same if not more intense scrutiny that classroom teachers. Those areas should be run like a business... supervisors who change curriculums (resulting in the needs of new purchases) construction managers who don't seem to benefit the district by helping provide a clear plan etc... all should be treated like their private sector counterparts.
|
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Mar 25, 2023 12:18:08 GMT -6
I will say this- I believe my particular district absolutely needs to reexamine the compensation structure. I personally think that those taking positions outside the classroom should not be paid the same or (worse) more than classroom teachers. These interventionists, specialists, "coaches" (not athletic but curriculum coaches or behavior coaches etc) should receive less than classroom teachers. And from an impartial point of view (because it negatively would impact me) I think that various teaching positions need to be compensated differently as well. An Elementary art teacher who sees 10 30 minute classes a day should not be paid the same as a 1st grade teacher who is with those students at all times save for lunch or enrichment class (such as art). A HS librarian should not be paid the same as an elementary librarian who has the responsibility of running a classroom as well as book checkout. I have decided that in the education world, they got things backwards. The NON classroom related parts of education need to be run much more like a business, and they need to get away from the business mindset when discussing classroom teachers and instruction. I agree with a lot of what you posted here, Coach. Regarding the academic "coaches", I worked at a district with low test scores (in other words, high poverty). Because our test scores were so low, state and federal laws required the district to hire "coaches" for each curricular area, including PE. Ostensibly, these "coaches" were supposed to be subject-matter experts who could help the other teachers in the department implement best practices in the classroom. In reality, the coaches were typically the longest-tenured members of each department and their biggest "contribution" was sending a couple links from Google searches a few times a week. The good thing was that we always had cool parties because each department now had a full-time, in-house party planner!  I also agree that districts should have more flexibility in hiring in-demand teachers. Teachers licensed in SpEd, math, foreign language, industrial arts, etc, etc, SHOULD make more money than PE and Social Studies teachers. |
|
|
|
Post by CS on Mar 25, 2023 12:19:42 GMT -6
I will say this- I believe my particular district absolutely needs to reexamine the compensation structure. I personally think that those taking positions outside the classroom should not be paid the same or (worse) more than classroom teachers. These interventionists, specialists, "coaches" (not athletic but curriculum coaches or behavior coaches etc) should receive less than classroom teachers. And from an impartial point of view (because it negatively would impact me) I think that various teaching positions need to be compensated differently as well. An Elementary art teacher who sees 10 30 minute classes a day should not be paid the same as a 1st grade teacher who is with those students at all times save for lunch or enrichment class (such as art). A HS librarian should not be paid the same as an elementary librarian who has the responsibility of running a classroom as well as book checkout. I have decided that in the education world, they got things backwards. The NON classroom related parts of education need to be run much more like a business, and they need to get away from the business mindset when discussing classroom teachers and instruction. I want to agree with this but can’t because I’m not sure what they do. I feel like it’s the same reason teachers hate us as coaches because we make more money than them I do agree that certain teachers should make more than others |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Mar 25, 2023 12:38:04 GMT -6
I will say this- I believe my particular district absolutely needs to reexamine the compensation structure. I personally think that those taking positions outside the classroom should not be paid the same or (worse) more than classroom teachers. These interventionists, specialists, "coaches" (not athletic but curriculum coaches or behavior coaches etc) should receive less than classroom teachers. And from an impartial point of view (because it negatively would impact me) I think that various teaching positions need to be compensated differently as well. An Elementary art teacher who sees 10 30 minute classes a day should not be paid the same as a 1st grade teacher who is with those students at all times save for lunch or enrichment class (such as art). A HS librarian should not be paid the same as an elementary librarian who has the responsibility of running a classroom as well as book checkout. I have decided that in the education world, they got things backwards. The NON classroom related parts of education need to be run much more like a business, and they need to get away from the business mindset when discussing classroom teachers and instruction. I want to agree with this but can’t because I’m not sure what they do. I feel like it’s the same reason teachers hate us as coaches because we make more money than them I do agree that certain teachers should make more than others I don't think I agree with a blanket statement that teachers hate football coaches. I will say that teachers may hate the stereotypical football coach who thinks that his role from 3-7 is somehow an excuse to be below average from 7-3. But that is kind of a sidebar. When you say "you are not sure what they do", who is the "they". Are you talking about other non core teachers, or the other positions mentioned (small group interventionist, behavior coaches, instructional coaches, curriculum coaches, etc. ) |
|
|
|
Post by CS on Mar 25, 2023 12:48:12 GMT -6
I want to agree with this but can’t because I’m not sure what they do. I feel like it’s the same reason teachers hate us as coaches because we make more money than them I do agree that certain teachers should make more than others I don't think I agree with a blanket statement that teachers hate football coaches. I will say that teachers may hate the stereotypical football coach who thinks that his role from 3-7 is somehow an excuse to be below average from 7-3. But that is kind of a sidebar. When you say "you are not sure what they do", who is the "they". Are you talking about other non core teachers, or the other positions mentioned (small group interventionist, behavior coaches, instructional coaches, curriculum coaches, etc. ) Coaches/lead teachers. I really don’t know what they do yet I’ve had them at every school. And, with all do respect, at some districts what coaches do from 3-7 is what keeps them employed more than teaching the preamble. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Mar 25, 2023 13:06:00 GMT -6
I don't think I agree with a blanket statement that teachers hate football coaches. I will say that teachers may hate the stereotypical football coach who thinks that his role from 3-7 is somehow an excuse to be below average from 7-3. But that is kind of a sidebar. When you say "you are not sure what they do", who is the "they". Are you talking about other non core teachers, or the other positions mentioned (small group interventionist, behavior coaches, instructional coaches, curriculum coaches, etc. ) Coaches/lead teachers. I really don’t know what they do yet I’ve had them at every school. And, with all do respect, at some districts what coaches do from 3-7 is what keeps them employed more than teaching the preamble. I don't doubt the last statement. Have seen it in practice. As a taxpayer and citizen, I disagree whole heartedly with that premise. After more than half my life involved in athletics from the lower levels to Div 1 football- I think that removing interscholastic sports might not be a horrible thing. Regarding the coaches/lead teachers...they do work. Sure. But I maintain that principal task of education is the direct student instruction/engagement and as such those doing that work should be compensated more than those supporting/performing ancillary tasks in education. People take those positions to GET OUT OF THE CLASSROOM. I propose that if most people in those positions were told that to keep their position they would have to take a $2000-$3,000 pay cut, they wouldn't blink. |
|
|
|
Post by CS on Mar 25, 2023 14:25:05 GMT -6
Coaches/lead teachers. I really don’t know what they do yet I’ve had them at every school. And, with all do respect, at some districts what coaches do from 3-7 is what keeps them employed more than teaching the preamble. I don't doubt the last statement. Have seen it in practice. As a taxpayer and citizen, I disagree whole heartedly with that premise. After more than half my life involved in athletics from the lower levels to Div 1 football- I think that removing interscholastic sports might not be a horrible thing. Regarding the coaches/lead teachers...they do work. Sure. But I maintain that principal task of education is the direct student instruction/engagement and as such those doing that work should be compensated more than those supporting/performing ancillary tasks in education. People take those positions to GET OUT OF THE CLASSROOM. I propose that if most people in those positions were told that to keep their position they would have to take a $2000-$3,000 pay cut, they wouldn't blink. I agree with everything except the removing interscholastic sports. That would be a disaster |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Mar 25, 2023 14:27:42 GMT -6
I don't doubt the last statement. Have seen it in practice. As a taxpayer and citizen, I disagree whole heartedly with that premise. After more than half my life involved in athletics from the lower levels to Div 1 football- I think that removing interscholastic sports might not be a horrible thing. Regarding the coaches/lead teachers...they do work. Sure. But I maintain that principal task of education is the direct student instruction/engagement and as such those doing that work should be compensated more than those supporting/performing ancillary tasks in education. People take those positions to GET OUT OF THE CLASSROOM. I propose that if most people in those positions were told that to keep their position they would have to take a $2000-$3,000 pay cut, they wouldn't blink. I agree with everything except the removing interscholastic sports. That would be a disaster Agree to disagree with the last statement. Don't want to sidetrack this thread any further- but in all sports except football I would argue that a non-interscholastic avenue already exists that is on par if not superior (and in many cases vastly superior) to the interscholastic version with regards to competitiveness. |
|
|
|
Post by larrymoe on Mar 25, 2023 15:26:30 GMT -6
I also agree that districts should have more flexibility in hiring in-demand teachers. Teachers licensed in SpEd, math, foreign language, industrial arts, etc, etc, SHOULD make more money than PE and Social Studies teachers. With Illinois' teacher shortage, every position is in demand. |
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Mar 25, 2023 17:23:04 GMT -6
I also agree that districts should have more flexibility in hiring in-demand teachers. Teachers licensed in SpEd, math, foreign language, industrial arts, etc, etc, SHOULD make more money than PE and Social Studies teachers. With Illinois' teacher shortage, every position is in demand. Eh, it does depend on the position. PE or social studies jobs can still be filled. Maybe the number and quality of applicants is down, but I can guarantee that principals would much rather have to find a PE or social studies teacher than SpEd, math, foreign language, or industrial arts. Our district was so hard up to keep one of our SpEd teachers from leaving that they worked out a new position for her in which she gets to work from home after lunch. That’s not going to happen with PE or social studies. |
|
|
|
Post by CS on Mar 25, 2023 17:47:31 GMT -6
I agree with everything except the removing interscholastic sports. That would be a disaster Agree to disagree with the last statement. Don't want to sidetrack this thread any further- but in all sports except football I would argue that a non-interscholastic avenue already exists that is on par if not superior (and in many cases vastly superior) to the interscholastic version with regards to competitiveness. Not talking about competition chief. School culture and camaraderie are far superior in schools that have solid athletic programs. Plus you know the kids that can’t afford your more competitive teams can also get a chance to play. |
|
|
|
Post by larrymoe on Mar 25, 2023 19:57:11 GMT -6
With Illinois' teacher shortage, every position is in demand. Eh, it does depend on the position. PE or social studies jobs can still be filled. Maybe the number and quality of applicants is down, but I can guarantee that principals would much rather have to find a PE or social studies teacher than SpEd, math, foreign language, or industrial arts. Our district was so hard up to keep one of our SpEd teachers from leaving that they worked out a new position for her in which she gets to work from home after lunch. That’s not going to happen with PE or social studies. My wife's school was so desperate for SpEd, they paid for her to get certified and gave her the job before she even enrolled in classes. She was the only applicant. |
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Mar 25, 2023 20:02:53 GMT -6
Eh, it does depend on the position. PE or social studies jobs can still be filled. Maybe the number and quality of applicants is down, but I can guarantee that principals would much rather have to find a PE or social studies teacher than SpEd, math, foreign language, or industrial arts. Our district was so hard up to keep one of our SpEd teachers from leaving that they worked out a new position for her in which she gets to work from home after lunch. That’s not going to happen with PE or social studies. My wife's school was so desperate for SpEd, they paid for her to get certified and gave her the job before she even enrolled in classes. She was the only applicant. Yep. That’s rapidly becoming the norm. |
|
mc140
Sophomore Member
Posts: 220
Member is Online
|
Post by mc140 on Mar 26, 2023 0:10:02 GMT -6
Getting rid of the salary schedule is a long game. It doesn't impact current teachers much but drastically reduces the pay of incoming teachers. Not coincidentally, many districts who do this have trouble retaining teachers. A person I work with applied for a job at what was once a high paying district (still is if you started before 2015). He was offered a job with a 14k pay cut as they do not give more than three years. He was told he could make up some of the difference by coaching two sports. He said they acted surprised when he told them he would pass on the job.
|
|
mc140
Sophomore Member
Posts: 220
Member is Online
|
Post by mc140 on Mar 26, 2023 0:11:52 GMT -6
Finding a job is easy right now. Finding a job that improves your pay if your 15-20 years in is the hard part.
|
|
|
|
Post by Defcord on Mar 26, 2023 2:35:17 GMT -6
Eh, it does depend on the position. PE or social studies jobs can still be filled. Maybe the number and quality of applicants is down, but I can guarantee that principals would much rather have to find a PE or social studies teacher than SpEd, math, foreign language, or industrial arts. Our district was so hard up to keep one of our SpEd teachers from leaving that they worked out a new position for her in which she gets to work from home after lunch. That’s not going to happen with PE or social studies. My wife's school was so desperate for SpEd, they paid for her to get certified and gave her the job before she even enrolled in classes. She was the only applicant. I think we are on the verge of special education laws being appeased by having all teachers take some mandatory training sessions to be certified in special education services instead of trying to train and incentivize hiring to get enough qualified candidates. Everyone will be worse off but it will look good on paper to lawmakers. It’s purely speculation but I just don’t see any other way for the compliance of laws for delivery accommodations will be met. |
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Mar 26, 2023 6:04:53 GMT -6
2. Budgeting- Do they have enough money to pay every teacher who deserves a raise? If you think so you haven't done this long enough. They'll budget a certain number of Golden Tickets and that'll be it. To me this is a scam to make it look like they're Doing Something but won't actually help teachers. Yep. And those Golden Ticket are most assuredly going to the administration's toadies and the "cool kids". |
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Mar 26, 2023 6:30:27 GMT -6
My wife's school was so desperate for SpEd, they paid for her to get certified and gave her the job before she even enrolled in classes. She was the only applicant. I think we are on the verge of special education laws being appeased by having all teachers take some mandatory training sessions to be certified in special education services instead of trying to train and incentivize hiring to get enough qualified candidates. Everyone will be worse off but it will look good on paper to lawmakers. It’s purely speculation but I just don’t see any other way for the compliance of laws for delivery accommodations will be met. When I first started teaching, I could count my SpEd students on one hand. And they were SpEd for something like dyslexia, which is a real thing. Now, I have dozens of kids with IEPs and 504 plans. And, by a large margin, they are mostly for behavior issues. Parents really push hard to get an IEP or 504 for their kid. I don't get it. I don't understand why a parent would want their kid labeled. When my youngest was in grade school, a teacher thought he was ADHD. Told my wife and I that he needed to be medicated and wanted him evaluated for SpEd. We said no. Our argument was that he needs to figure it out. We told her that if he was being a dope in the classroom and wasn't doing his work, she should contact us and we would handle it on our end. And you know what? He figured it out. He had an Associate's in Engineering before he graduated high school and is now about halfway through the US Navy nuke program down in South Carolina. I have to wonder if things would have been different if we had crippled him with an IEP. For a lot of parents, it's like some weird contest to have the most messed up kid. It used to be that the kids who were celebrated were the ones who had some special skill or ability. They were really smart. They were great at sports. They were good artists or musicians. But they had something special about them that they worked at and they excelled. Now, it seems that if you have a kid who is just average, that's not good enough for parents. They have to come up with something to make the kid "exceptional" even if it is something bad. We have kids in our school with ridiculous accommodations. They can take breaks whenever they want. They can leave class and go down to the gym to shoot hoops. They have an aid who writes for them. They get candy or prizes at the end of the day if they actually manage to trip over the hilariously low bar for their daily behavior goal. They are exempt from doing work or having consequences for misbehavior. Eligibility usually gets waived if they are out for sports. Those kids and their parents run the school and they know it. I used to take solace in the fact that the real world is going to come for those kids fast. And they are going to end up in some dead-end job or living with Mom and Dad because they can't function in the real world without all the propping up to which they have become accustomed. But, even that might be ending. And when these kids can't function in the adult world, it might end up being our fault anyway (LINK). |
|
