• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Ongoing NC GOP debacle thread

Deacon923 said:
Where is the evidence that cronyism is a bigger problem than bad teachers? Anecdotally, I think there may be some cronyism in small districts. Anecdotally, I also know that sorry teachers tend to get shuffled around school systems because it's a hassle to fire them, and principals would rather shuffle them off somewhere else than do the paperwork/go to a hearing. Hard to say which is the worse problem. Academic freedom is not the issue here; teachers acknowledge that it's about job security. Bottom line, they want to be harder to fire than people in the private sector. Why is that?
Click to expand...

Are you asking why public school teachers would like to keep a job benefit they've had since 1976(?) or why the legislation was passed in the first place?
 
Deacon923 said:
Where is the evidence that cronyism is a bigger problem than bad teachers? Anecdotally, I think there may be some cronyism in small districts. Anecdotally, I also know that sorry teachers tend to get shuffled around school systems because it's a hassle to fire them, and principals would rather shuffle them off somewhere else than do the paperwork/go to a hearing. Hard to say which is the worse problem. Academic freedom is not the issue here; teachers acknowledge that it's about job security. Bottom line, they want to be harder to fire than people in the private sector. Why is that?
Click to expand...

In part, it is to compensate for low pay. Also, principals can be, ummm, interesting.
 
They also say they want higher pay and to be treated like professionals, etc. Highly paid professionals in the private sector don't have these protections. How many of us have the same job benefits we had/would have had in 1976?
 
Plus, only without job security, being subject to the whims of the legislature could be a concern.
 
Deacon923 said:
They also say they want higher pay and to be treated like professionals, etc. Highly paid professionals in the private sector don't have these protections. How many of us have the same job benefits we had/would have had in 1976?
Click to expand...

I'm sure they'd consider higher pay in exchange for no tenure. Might make sense for some/most, but not all.
 
My question is why should every function and facet of private business be replicated in public service? Public school teachers are not private employees, they are not privy to many of the benefits of private employment, so why should they be treated like private employees?
 
Nobody's saying that every facet of private business should be replicated in the school system. That's a strawman. Teachers still have a very generous pension system and better health care than is normal in the private sector. I also think that trying to set up "rise to the top" pay packages where you pay teachers more based on test scores etc. is the wrong way to compensate teachers. That works for type A business types in competitive professions, it is not the right way to compensate people in an educational setting that needs to be heavily based on teamwork and a focus on what is right for the child. I just think that tenure is an outmoded concept, and the need of school systems to be agile with personnel decisions in the modern world needs to be weighed against teachers' insistence that they be treated differently than other kinds of workers (notably including private school teachers and charter school teachers).
 
Here in my private sector job, I'm not subject to the whims of whatever political party is planning to scapegoat me this year.
 
Look at what's happening to teachers assistants. They don't get tenure (somebody correct me if I'm wrong), and the legislature decided money was needed elsewhere...so they get axed. Can't just arbitrarily axe a few thousand teachers though.
 
And most private sector workers have the option of working for multiple employers within the same city and having some upward mobility in pay and career opportunities. Teachers don't have that. Outside of those who move up in the administration, they're asked to stay in the same job for 30 years with a narrowly defined pay range.
 
Teachers are also at the whims of parents and students. Go ask any teacher if they've ever been threatened by a parent or student, or had either outright lie to attempt to get that teacher in trouble.
 
explain+these+grades.jpg
 
Deacon923 said:
Nobody's saying that every facet of private business should be replicated in the school system. That's a strawman. Teachers still have a very generous pension system and better health care than is normal in the private sector. I also think that trying to set up "rise to the top" pay packages where you pay teachers more based on test scores etc. is the wrong way to compensate teachers. That works for type A business types in competitive professions, it is not the right way to compensate people in an educational setting that needs to be heavily based on teamwork and a focus on what is right for the child. I just think that tenure is an outmoded concept, and the need of school systems to be agile with personnel decisions in the modern world needs to be weighed against teachers' insistence that they be treated differently than other kinds of workers (notably including private school teachers and charter school teachers).
Click to expand...
The fact that fiscal conservatives are attempting to privatize or generally apply capitalist concepts to the public service arena, is in no way a strawman. Public school teachers need protection from swaying political whims. If it's been demonstratably shown that the firing process for teachers is too difficult for principles then the process needs to be addressed.
 
Deadbolt said:
Look at what's happening to teachers assistants. They don't get tenure (somebody correct me if I'm wrong), and the legislature decided money was needed elsewhere...so they get axed. Can't just arbitrarily axe a few thousand teachers though.
Click to expand...

I actually don't think that's true. If the state wants to cut funding and drop a RIF on the teachers of the state, they can do that. The teachers with tenure basically get preference over younger teachers, but once the district runs out of newbies to fire, absolutely the tenured teachers would get the axe.
 
myDeaconmyhand said:
The fact that fiscal conservatives are attempting to privatize or generally apply capitalist concepts to the public service arena, is in no way a strawman. Public school teachers need protection from swaying political whims. If it's been demonstratably shown that the firing process for teachers is too difficult for principles then the process needs to be addressed.
Click to expand...

Your first sentence, I certainly agree with. The second sentence, I think, is mostly relevant to small districts where a teacher's opposition to some small-town politician could result in dismissal. The third is exactly what has happened. Teachers would say, I suppose, that the firing process is already plenty easy, administrators would probably beg to differ.
 
Deacon923 said:
They also say they want higher pay and to be treated like professionals, etc. Highly paid professionals in the private sector don't have these protections. How many of us have the same job benefits we had/would have had in 1976?
Click to expand...

Excellent point. Either a pension OR tenure is hard to find in the private sector. BOTH? Unheard of.
 
Deacon923 said:
Your first sentence, I certainly agree with. The second sentence, I think, is mostly relevant to small districts where a teacher's opposition to some small-town politician could result in dismissal. The third is exactly what has happened. Teachers would say, I suppose, that the firing process is already plenty easy, administrators would probably beg to differ.
Click to expand...

Except principals aren't the ones out there pushing for this. I could see your point if they were.
 
myDeaconmyhand said:
My question is why should every function and facet of private business be replicated in public service? Public school teachers are not private employees, they are not privy to many of the benefits of private employment, so why should they be treated like private employees?
Click to expand...

Because bootstraps, that's why.
 
Deadbolt said:
Look at what's happening to teachers assistants. They don't get tenure (somebody correct me if I'm wrong), and the legislature decided money was needed elsewhere...so they get axed. Can't just arbitrarily axe a few thousand teachers though.
Click to expand...

Correct.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top