Public Sector Union Beatdown Bloodbath Legismania 2011 Wisconsin-style

[Crazed Rabbit]

1. Tenure is there because parents are idiots. I fully support removing tenure in favor of a more fluid and workable teacher's bill of rights, but without the union, teachers would literally become babysitters and not figuratively. 95% of parents don't keep track of their students, as long as the students comes home without bruises and passes classes, they don't care. But 5% of parents seem to think that they need to start telling teachers what books they can and can't teach, what grades their children should be getting etc... In fact your first statement does even make sense, by getting rid of bad teachers, good teachers have an easier life? Except for the fact that bad teachers don't affect good teachers, they only affect the students.

So what about those parents who want to tell teachers what to do? Don't listen to them.

Yes, getting rid of bad teachers, who teach students poorly, makes things easier for other teachers who don't have to deal with poorly taught students in other grades or classes.

There is no way to judge how good a teacher is quantitatively to a precise measurement.

It doesn't have to be perfect. But using student test grades (and scaling AP class grades as appropriate) is a lot better than the current union endorsed system.

That makes no sense, and doesn't even hold up to the slightest scrutiny.

It doesn't?

The public perception of police and firefighters is that they face dangers hardly anyone else does. That they sacrifice a lot for modest wages. So when the governor doesn't go after their unions he doesn't appear stingy with 'heroes', and by comparison he appears more reasonable when he tries to cut the other unions.

I don't really mind our governor going after the public sector unions, but it bothers me that everyone thinks it's fine to attack the girls (teachers) and save the plums for the boys (police and firefighters). Seems like some sort of reflexive sexist bullhockey. Your thoughtless response just reinforces that impression.

Oh, and prison guards aren't mostly men?

You accuse me of sexism while generalizing all teachers as women, and all police as men?

You assume I don't want police unions busted up simply because I offered a reason why they weren't included?

But why bother about all that when you can accuse me of sexism?

CR

[a completely inoffensive name]

So what about those parents who want to tell teachers what to do? Don't listen to them.

Yes, getting rid of bad teachers, who teach students poorly, makes things easier for other teachers who don't have to deal with poorly taught students in other grades or classes.

You don't understand the school system. Parents get what they want because the school board in many cases are elected by the district public. They want to keep their job so they for the most part concede and force schools to accept the demands of parents. Same goes for school administration.

Example: The woman of this blog: http://fortheloveofya.blogspot.com/2...g-down_05.html
Originally posted this story (before she removed it because of reasons given in the first link): (this is a mirrow someone made btw)http://speakloudly.org/2010/10/censo...mullins-story/

EDIT: Your second sentence there still doesn't make sense. How one teacher teaches does not affect another "good" teacher. If a math teacher is bad at teaching math, the students are not inherently dumber when they walk into their english class.

It doesn't have to be perfect. But using student test grades (and scaling AP class grades as appropriate) is a lot better than the current union endorsed system.
CR

But isn't for the reasons I described. Instead of treating teachers equally we would be shafting the majority of teachers stuck with the regular students. They will be angry at how teachers that do less work because their students are motivated get paid more. This means that more teachers both good and bad will leave the profession which means less for our students which means higher class room sizes which are already overcrowded etc... it is just a terrible idea that is actually worse than the status quo.

[Crazed Rabbit]

You don't understand the school system. Parents get what they want because the school board in many cases are elected by the district public. They want to keep their job so they for the most part concede and force schools to accept the demands of parents. Same goes for school administration.

You just said 5% of parents were the problem - how can such a minority force anyone to accept their demands? If that's the issue, there's bigger problems.

But isn't for the reasons I described. Instead of treating teachers equally we would be shafting the majority of teachers stuck with the regular students. They will be angry at how teachers that do less work because their students are motivated get paid more. This means that more teachers both good and bad will leave the profession which means less for our students which means higher class room sizes which are already overcrowded etc... it is just a terrible idea that is actually worse than the status quo.

It doesn't have to be perfect. But using student test grades (and scaling AP class grades as appropriate) is a lot better than the current union endorsed system.

That means (as a quick example only) teachers with students in AP classes averaging A's on state exams would get the same pay as teachers in non-AP classes with students averaging B's.



CR

[a completely inoffensive name]

You just said 5% of parents were the problem - how can such a minority force anyone to accept their demands? If that's the issue, there's bigger problems.

I don't know CR, how does any group of people that are not a majority manage to get anything done in politics? The school board does what ever the public wants it to do. When the only members of the public that interact with them are the 5% that are crazy and selfish, then those are the only people they will listen to.

It is just like how come politicians don't respond to what the youth want, but love to cater to older people? Why is that? Because older people interact with government through voting a whole lot more than the youth do.

That means (as a quick example only) teachers with students in AP classes averaging A's on state exams would get the same pay as teachers in non-AP classes with students averaging B's.



CR

Except that correlation doesn't make sense. Why does an AP A equal an average B? Where is the correlation? You need some basis to go off of otherwise it is just pissing i nthe wind and would still be unfair. As I have already said, the quality of teachers cannot be quantitatively measured to the degree of precision you need to make a system like this work.

[Crazed Rabbit]

I don't know CR, how does any group of people that are not a majority manage to get anything done in politics? The school board does what ever the public wants it to do. When the only members of the public that interact with them are the 5% that are crazy and selfish, then those are the only people they will listen to.

It is just like how come politicians don't respond to what the youth want, but love to cater to older people? Why is that? Because older people interact with government through voting a whole lot more than the youth do.

It's because old people vote. Interaction has squat to do with it. And those 5% of crazies wouldn't control elections - even if they were all crazy in the same ways on the same issues. The school board wouldn't be that stupid.

Except that correlation doesn't make sense. Why does an AP A equal an average B? Where is the correlation? You need some basis to go off of otherwise it is just pissing i nthe wind and would still be unfair.

Good grief.

(as a quick example only)

As I have already said, the quality of teachers cannot be quantitatively measured to the degree of precision you need to make a system like this work.

Sure it can. It may not work perfectly, but it would work a heck of a lot better than the current "pay teachers more if they've been around longer, regardless of how well they teach".

CR

[Sasaki Kojiro]

Where is the evidence that the problems in education are with the teachers? At all?

[a completely inoffensive name]

It's because old people vote. Interaction has squat to do with it. And those 5% of crazies wouldn't control elections - even if they were all crazy in the same ways on the same issues. The school board wouldn't be that stupid.

Is not voting not an interaction between the public and the government? Every time we vote the government reacts to our demands (theoretically).

I am not going to say that the 5% "control" electrons. But this is the situation. Most parents don't care, like I said earlier. They will keep voting in the same people, time after time after time because they don't pay attention, like with a lot of local elections. The 5% that are crazy (I regret using that word), the 5% that are inadvertently undermining the system and teachers, will go that extra mile to smear by word of mouth to as many parents as possible. They portray a member as hurtful towards the future of your children or whatever emotional statement you can come up with involving children. People get worried over their children and start voting out people. School boards know this, so they go along with the extreme 5%. Why else has there been a "most banned books" list from the American Library Association for the past couple decades? It's because this extreme 5% holds a lot of power.

The school board is actually very smart in this case. They know that parents are quite happy to vote out an incumbent if they feel their children's lives are in danger.

Sure it can. It may not work perfectly, but it would work a heck of a lot better than the current "pay teachers more if they've been around longer, regardless of how well they teach".

CR

Ok, maybe I have gone about this in the wrong way. Why exactly is this a better method? I have already given numerous reasons why it is worse. You have not countered them, but you insist that merit pay is somehow better. Please elaborate why. Please also elaborate on how you can measure the quality of teachers precisely enough to be able to create a weighing system that is fair for AP teachers and regular teachers alike. Please don't throw out "as a quick example", because if you recognize that your quick example has major flaws in it that need elaboration than elaborate before declaring again that your system is better.

I want to clarify. I think the current system sucks. I know first hand that older teachers can be worse from being burnt out for so many years and as such don't deserve the pay they get. But merit pay is even worse because it turns teachers against each other and forces a "weighing" system that from what I can tell is neither factually supported to be accurate or immune from manipulation.

[drone]

The biggest travesty here is the union's support of Democrat election efforts. Lemur and his fellow cheeseheads pay state income tax, sales tax, and property tax to the Wisconsin state government and municipal governments. A large percentage of these taxes goes to education, and the salaries of teachers. Automatically deducted from these salaries are union dues, and a fair amount of these dues goes to the political campaigns of Democrats across the state. This is something public sector unions should not be able to do.

[Whacker]

Ahh, the backroom. Yet again I shall gaze into the abyss.

Seeing how I'm married to a 3rd grade teacher, I'd just like to say that ACIN has a very solid grasp of what's going on in the teaching world these days. I'm no fan of unions, but seeing what NC has been doing to it's teachers over the past year or two and what they've gotten away with because NC has no teachers union is appalling. On top of that, I'm to understand that RDU's board of education has made it on national news for all of the ridiculously stupid crap they've been pulling lately, and there's even talk of the local schools losing accreditation. There are a very, very few problem teachers that can and should be fired, but from what I've seen through my wife's eyes in trying to get rid of the trouble teachers, it's not a damn bit different than if there were a union or not. In short, I don't see unions or the lack thereof as the problem in terms of teaching. At least not here in this state.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Seeing how I'm married to a 3rd grade teacher, I'd just like to say that ACIN has a very solid grasp of what's going on in the teaching world these days.

Thank you.