RI Superintendent to Fire All Teachers

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
281

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]SteelyD wrote:
Ah, OK, so HH has gone the route of the classic Liberal stance: “Oh, but it could happen, so we MUST demand things NOW”, yet STILL offers nothing to the discussion of SOLUTIONS.
[/quote]

Oh but he has, you are just not paying attention.

Get rid of public education and you get rid of the unions.

[/quote]

Jesus Christ, Orion, you’re a goddammed genius.

I’m the LAST person in these forums that supports government schools. Flipping the coin, if you stop funding the unions, they’ll stop contributing to politicians who give more power over education.

282

[quote]doubleh wrote:

OK… but actually, it seems like your point was teachers unionized because they were underpaid and exploited. And it sure sounded like you were pro-union.[/quote]

I’m saying that forming a union was the only option against the predominate public school system, a system which uses tax dollars to compete against all comers.

Other posters here are complaining about the unions but what do they offer regarding a system that caused the unions to spring up in the first place?

If all we do is hamstring or somehow abolish the unions without getting rid of the public schools, then we’re going to wind up in exactly the same situation as we have now.

We’re blaming the crops when what we really have is lousy soil.

283

[quote]doubleh wrote:

HH, I’d like your opinion on teachers compensation where I’m from: Long Island, NY. Starting salaries average around $50k. Assuming masters within the given timeframe, 5 years in they make $70k. Tenure at 3 years. Top of the scale is around $120k, give or take depending on the district. Insane health care coverage for life, generous pension, etc.

So let’s say a couple, 2 teachers with masters degrees, say 15+ years on the job each, would take home salary alone pushing a quarter of a million dollars a year. And that’s just salary - let’s not forget about the health care and pension, easily another 25-30k worth of comp. Plus, they have this job for life. Can’t be fired. And oh by the way, they work 190 days a year.

Education on Long Island is NO BETTER than any other cross-section of the country, and it depends (as usual) almost entirely on socio-economic factors as to where the “smart” kids are, not the quality of teachers. And we can assume the quality is pretty high, because school districts up here - and they are not especially big compared to county-wide systems in other states - generally fill a handful of positions from applicant pools in the thousands. Pretty easy to see why.

All that being said, property taxes up here are insane. It’s pretty common to see tax bills $10,000+ annually. And when budgets get voted down, the school districts cut sports b/c they can’t fire teachers. Sports!!

So, again, is the compensation I describe fair? Or is the government monopoly raping the poor teachers and their weak little union?[/quote]

[quote]SteelyD wrote:
double h - I just got my financials for my kid’s (private) school this week. Tuition is going up next year. Our (non-union) teachers get paid, on average, about 10% below that of the local public school teachers and have similar benefits, except they contribute some out of pocket like the rest of the private sector (unlike gov’t teachers), and private retirement funds (versus the bloated state system). They also don’t have the concept of ‘tenure’.

Our school outperforms every public school in the state. We only even compare to other private schools and other schools across New England.

Guess how much our “cost per student” is?

Regardless of what some whiny teachers will say, six-figure salaried, cadillac benefitted, tenured teachers are not what makes successful educators and schools.

Note: We do not ‘drive down’ or ‘enslave’ our teachers. Our school has a history of giving teachers raises every year and do all we can for them because they’re GREAT teachers who perform wonderfully and they love their jobs.

Did I mention they’re non-union, and non-government?[/quote]

I agree, and that is why I am in favor of marit-based pay and “revolving” tenure (tenure given for only a certain period of years before it must be renewed), if not eliminating tenure all together. And in fact, the opposite of the above is true: the 6-figure, long-term teacher is also the one most likely to be “burned out” and putting forth less of an effort in the classroom. I’m not saying that’s always the case, but my brother-in-law is an administartor here on LI, and he sees it every day. And he can’t fire them.

My son started kindergarten last fall. His school has, I think, 6 or 7 K classrooms. One of the teachers is a former NY state Teacher of the Year. My sister-in-law is also a teacher in the same school, so we were able to get my son in her classroom. Let me tell you, even her sterling reputation doesn’t do her justice. She is AMAZING with the kids. In my mind, there is no way she should make the same amount of $ as some slug across the hall who throws worksheets on the kids’ desks all day long, while she is a non-stop bundle of energy and entusiasm, just b/c they’ve been teaching the same amoun of time. Were this the private sector, she wouldnt. But such is the system we are in, although the discontent among the population up here is getting liuder and louder.

284

[quote]doubleh wrote:

[quote]Headhunter wrote:

Just because I UNDERSTAND why unions were formed doesn’t mean I support them.

I am against government schools. Schools should compete in all aspects, just like any other business. But they don’t, and so the teachers reacted by unionizing. THAT’S my point.

[/quote]

OK… but actually, it seems like your point was teachers unionized because they were underpaid and exploited. And it sure sounded like you were pro-union.[/quote]

Everybody and their mother understands why unions were created way back in the day. They don’t function like that now.

If you’re so ‘anti-union’, then stop wasting bandwidth trolling and defending them. And stop trolling and name calling (like a fucking child).

Why don’t you join the topic start offering some alternatives to what happened in Rhode Island.

I’ll post this all day:
http://www.schoolandstate.org/home.htm

You see, some in the union “say” they’re ‘anti-government’, when in reality what they “do” is enable more government (lobbying for more laws, contributions, blocking vouchers, etc).

Orion, do you know what we call that disconnect between “say” and “do” in the U.S.? “Hypocrisy”

285

[quote]doubleh wrote:

My son started kindergarten last fall. His school has, I think, 6 or 7 K classrooms. One of the teachers is a former NY state Teacher of the Year. My sister-in-law is also a teacher in the same school, so we were able to get my son in her classroom. Let me tell you, even her sterling reputation doesn’t do her justice. She is AMAZING with the kids. In my mind, there is no way she should make the same amount of $ as some slug across the hall who throws worksheets on the kids’ desks all day long, while she is a non-stop bundle of energy and entusiasm, just b/c they’ve been teaching the same amoun of time. Were this the private sector, she wouldnt. But such is the system we are in, although the discontent among the population up here is getting liuder and louder.[/quote]

Exactly. Monopolies breed unions, which punish outstanding workers within a profession.

Vouchers would be a good start toward getting rid of both unions and the monopoly schools.

286

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]SteelyD wrote:
Ah, OK, so HH has gone the route of the classic Liberal stance: “Oh, but it could happen, so we MUST demand things NOW”, yet STILL offers nothing to the discussion of SOLUTIONS.
[/quote]

Oh but he has, you are just not paying attention.

Get rid of public education and you get rid of the unions. [/quote]
To be effective in the real world at solving problems, it is bad to have an attitude that if the perfect solution cannot presently be achieved then the hell with it, we won’t go with an intermediate improvement but will stick with utter crap.

It is in closer reach for a given school to tell the union “Screw you, we will deal with you no further: Each individual teacher that wishes to work for us under the terms we offer and whom we wish to hire is welcome here, and as for the rest of you, don’t let the door hit your worthless ass on the way out” than it is to abolish government education today.

(Not that the second wouldn’t be a great further thing to accomplish.)

Our thread here was on a simple topic: What this RI school had offered, what they were told by the union, and what their response was.

You tell me what HH’s solution was, that was actually a doable solution today.

The RI superintendent figured it out: HH never has yet, or if he has he certainly hasn’t posted it. The basic summary of what I’ve seen from him is whining that what teachers get isn’t fair.

[/quote]

Ah, you want him to tell you how to make socialism work.

I am afraid that is beyond the reach of mere men.

287

[quote]SteelyD wrote:

Orion, do you know what we call that disconnect between “say” and “do” in the U.S.? “Hypocrisy”[/quote]

We call that “human”, but we are a very Catholic country.

288

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]SteelyD wrote:
Ah, OK, so HH has gone the route of the classic Liberal stance: “Oh, but it could happen, so we MUST demand things NOW”, yet STILL offers nothing to the discussion of SOLUTIONS.
[/quote]

Oh but he has, you are just not paying attention.

Get rid of public education and you get rid of the unions. [/quote]
To be effective in the real world at solving problems, it is bad to have an attitude that if the perfect solution cannot presently be achieved then the hell with it, we won’t go with an intermediate improvement but will stick with utter crap.

It is in closer reach for a given school to tell the union “Screw you, we will deal with you no further: Each individual teacher that wishes to work for us under the terms we offer and whom we wish to hire is welcome here, and as for the rest of you, don’t let the door hit your worthless ass on the way out” than it is to abolish government education today.

(Not that the second wouldn’t be a great further thing to accomplish.)

Our thread here was on a simple topic: What this RI school had offered, what they were told by the union, and what their response was.

You tell me what HH’s solution was, that was actually a doable solution today.

The RI superintendent figured it out: HH never has yet, or if he has he certainly hasn’t posted it. The basic summary of what I’ve seen from him is whining that what teachers get isn’t fair.

[/quote]

Ah, you want him to tell you how to make socialism work.

I am afraid that is beyond the reach of mere men.
[/quote]

You see, that is the difference between armchair analysis and making a difference in the real world.

The RI superintendent has acted to improve, as much as what in fact can be done by her at this precise time, the education of her students. She had a response to the particular situation at hand.

You in your armchair recline and say, ah, nothing can be done, other than abandoning socialism.

And since she couldn’t do that, therefore in your world that was that.

Her approach was useful; yours is “armchair.”

289

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:

The RI superintendent has acted to improve, as much as what in fact can be done by her at this precise time, the education of her students. She had a response to the particular situation at hand.

You in your armchair recline and say, ah, nothing can be done, other than abandoning socialism.

And since she couldn’t do that, therefore in your world that was that.

Her approach was useful; yours is “armchair.”[/quote]

And then the RI super went on television and announced that, for the good of the children, she was calling for the end of the public school monopoly and the unions that sprang up as a result.

She thus summarily resigned from her job. And pigs flew.

290

Brilliant analysis, and pretty much identical to Orion’s.

If the ideal cannot be attained at this moment then there’s just nothing to do but submit to the teachers’ unions – other than voice complaints that teachers aren’t paid “fairly,” of course.

And you have no way of knowing whether she has publicly supported vouchers or not. Perhaps she has.

But I do know that the teachers’ unions fight them tooth and nail and the principal reason most areas do not have a voucher system is extreme opposition from the teacher’s unions.

(Those noble fighters against monopoly.)

And in any case, her job is to run the schools under her control the best she can for the education of the students. She took an action here which likely gives improvement there, and her previous effort – calling on the teachers to put in a little more work and some one-on-one tutoring for somewhat more pay – was towards the same goal.

Nowhere do I see you applauding her work towards improving the lot of the students.

Instead it’s waaah, waaaah, waah, teachers aren’t paid “fairly.”

Rather like the teachers’ unions, you really seem to operate from the basis that the schools exist, really, to benefit the teachers. News flash: no one else sees it that way and that is not their purpose.

291

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]SteelyD wrote:
Ah, OK, so HH has gone the route of the classic Liberal stance: “Oh, but it could happen, so we MUST demand things NOW”, yet STILL offers nothing to the discussion of SOLUTIONS.
[/quote]

Oh but he has, you are just not paying attention.

Get rid of public education and you get rid of the unions. [/quote]
To be effective in the real world at solving problems, it is bad to have an attitude that if the perfect solution cannot presently be achieved then the hell with it, we won’t go with an intermediate improvement but will stick with utter crap.

It is in closer reach for a given school to tell the union “Screw you, we will deal with you no further: Each individual teacher that wishes to work for us under the terms we offer and whom we wish to hire is welcome here, and as for the rest of you, don’t let the door hit your worthless ass on the way out” than it is to abolish government education today.

(Not that the second wouldn’t be a great further thing to accomplish.)

Our thread here was on a simple topic: What this RI school had offered, what they were told by the union, and what their response was.

You tell me what HH’s solution was, that was actually a doable solution today.

The RI superintendent figured it out: HH never has yet, or if he has he certainly hasn’t posted it. The basic summary of what I’ve seen from him is whining that what teachers get isn’t fair.

[/quote]

Ah, you want him to tell you how to make socialism work.

I am afraid that is beyond the reach of mere men.
[/quote]

You see, that is the difference between armchair analysis and making a difference in the real world.

The RI superintendent has acted to improve, as much as what in fact can be done by her at this precise time, the education of her students. She had a response to the particular situation at hand.

You in your armchair recline and say, ah, nothing can be done, other than abandoning socialism.

And since she couldn’t do that, therefore in your world that was that.

Her approach was useful; yours is “armchair.”[/quote]

You see, that is why armchair analysis has its time and place.

If your armchair analyisis revealed to you that people are basically asking how to put lipstick on a pig most effectively, you would probably ask yourself why someone would try to do that in the first place.

Since my time and resources are limited I prefer to not spend them on working on a more “humane” socialism.

One could say that I am on a strike.

292

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]SteelyD wrote:
Ah, OK, so HH has gone the route of the classic Liberal stance: “Oh, but it could happen, so we MUST demand things NOW”, yet STILL offers nothing to the discussion of SOLUTIONS.
[/quote]

Oh but he has, you are just not paying attention.

Get rid of public education and you get rid of the unions. [/quote]
To be effective in the real world at solving problems, it is bad to have an attitude that if the perfect solution cannot presently be achieved then the hell with it, we won’t go with an intermediate improvement but will stick with utter crap.

It is in closer reach for a given school to tell the union “Screw you, we will deal with you no further: Each individual teacher that wishes to work for us under the terms we offer and whom we wish to hire is welcome here, and as for the rest of you, don’t let the door hit your worthless ass on the way out” than it is to abolish government education today.

(Not that the second wouldn’t be a great further thing to accomplish.)

Our thread here was on a simple topic: What this RI school had offered, what they were told by the union, and what their response was.

You tell me what HH’s solution was, that was actually a doable solution today.

The RI superintendent figured it out: HH never has yet, or if he has he certainly hasn’t posted it. The basic summary of what I’ve seen from him is whining that what teachers get isn’t fair.

[/quote]

Ah, you want him to tell you how to make socialism work.

I am afraid that is beyond the reach of mere men.
[/quote]

You see, that is the difference between armchair analysis and making a difference in the real world.

The RI superintendent has acted to improve, as much as what in fact can be done by her at this precise time, the education of her students. She had a response to the particular situation at hand.

You in your armchair recline and say, ah, nothing can be done, other than abandoning socialism.

And since she couldn’t do that, therefore in your world that was that.

Her approach was useful; yours is “armchair.”[/quote]

You see, that is why armchair analysis has its time and place.

If your armchair analyisis revealed to you that people are basically asking how to put lipstick on a pig most effectively, you would probably ask yourself why someone would try to do that in the first place.

Since my time and resources are limited I prefer to not spend them on working on a more “humane” socialism.

One could say that I am on a strike.

[/quote]

To lay down and do nothing because “alas, nothing can be done” is not a solution.

This superintendent did something. Something. Extreme? Maybe, but the union gave nothing.

I could not fathom supporting a union that gives so much money to perpetuate the monopoly they supposedly abhor.

It’s like the tick hating the dog it relies on for survival. Ticks may hate the dog, but like a good parasite, they don’t kill the host.

I don’t buy Sara Lee products or anything that I know is in that brand’s family because of their contributions to anti-gun groups. I never voted for transportation bonds or programs when I worked for the D.O.T. I can’t fathom defending or contributing to a union that offers nothing in the way of solutions to ‘the government’, such as vouchers, charter schools, merit-based performance pay, school choice scholarships and a whole host of others.

Teachers unions fought Florida’s school choice scholarship programs. How does THAT help kids?

Home schooled kids consistently outperform public school children and many private school kids. What teacher salary and benefits do the parents receive for teaching their kids? Nothing – They’re not entitled, those parents are empowered.

293

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
(Those noble fighters against monopoly.)

[/quote]

That’s not their purpose. They are one gang fighting another gang. Their common enemy is the INDIVIDUAL, the individual human mind.

Haven’t you figured that out yet?

294

Fighting to make the irrational work is an object lesson in frustration.

If one of your friends was hell bent on spending himself into bankruptcy, there comes a point where you simply say: “If that’s what you choose to do, go ahead. I won’t try and stop you anymore.”

This system is dying. The looters’ state has borrowed to the hilt and is inflating to the hilt, to stave off what is mathematically certain. Do you choose to try and stop it? How do you pay off trillions without simply eliminating all social spending and watching millions suffer?

In the same way, monopoly schools are at their end. They want to crush their rivals, the unions, as the system thrashes about in its death throes. You want to stop it? Are you the Messiah?

Okay, we’ll be sure and applaud.

295

[quote]SteelyD wrote:

solutions to ‘the government’, such as vouchers, charter schools, merit-based performance pay, school choice scholarships and a whole host of others.
[/quote]

How are vouchers or charter schools not part of “the government?” Vouchers are given by the government and charter schools are public schools.

How is the government connected to merit based pay or school choice scholarships?

It appears you’re simply labeling things you don’t like as “government.” Earlier you said something like, “federal, state, or local makes no difference” …do you honestly believe that? Isn’t that an extremely simplistic view?

One final question. Are you a member of the “tea party?”

296

[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:

[quote]SteelyD wrote:

solutions to ‘the government’, such as vouchers, charter schools, merit-based performance pay, school choice scholarships and a whole host of others.
[/quote]

How are vouchers or charter schools not part of “the government?” Vouchers are given by the government and charter schools are public schools.

How is the government connected to merit based pay or school choice scholarships?

It appears you’re simply labeling things you don’t like as “government.” Earlier you said something like, “federal, state, or local makes no difference” …do you honestly believe that? Isn’t that an extremely simplistic view?

One final question. Are you a member of the “tea party?” [/quote]

re: tea party – no. Relevance?

I’m not ‘simply labeling things’. I am listing things that are steps towards change. Orion and HH think that since you just can’t abolish “the government” outright, there are no solutions for change.

I never said those things are or are not ‘wholly the government’, those are your words and/or your inference, although I guess on re-read, I can see where you might think that from my poor grammar.

I’m for taking small steps towards change. The fact that I do support those things that are not ‘abolish the government outright’ illustrate that, although I certainly would support wholly abolishing government run education. What I did say (or at least the point I was trying to make) was that the unions were against any of those things at any scale. Make sense?

297

Want blunt honest? There are times when you appear to be making sense, and other times when you appear to be foaming at the mouth, calling names, and saying “it’s all the government’s fault!!!” (this is why I asked about the tea party.)

298

[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
Want blunt honest? There are times when you appear to be making sense, and other times when you appear to be foaming at the mouth, calling names, and saying “it’s all the government’s fault!!!” (this is why I asked about the tea party.)
[/quote]

Well, OK. But, really you seem to be describing HH, which is apparently OK (ie mouth foaming, name calling, loony ‘government is enemy’, etc) when you’re agreeing with him.

  1. I’m not a conspiracy guy, and I’m not the mouth foamy type. I rabidly despise government unions as I see them as an extreme conflict of interest. Mouth foaming? Maybe.

  2. Name calling – see “Headhunter”, brah. (I guess that’s his way of trying to be consdescending to a weight lifter… you know, in a forum on a bodybuilding website…)

  3. “Government is the enemy”. Well? I am a small government libertarian, and I’m consistent in my beliefs. Take that for what it is. I’ve offered several examples of consistency.

I’ve listed several small steps that schools/govt etc could take to improve education for students and teachers alike. The unions do not support and any of those and especially not those that involve taking money away from schools (vouchers, etc), and the ‘big government’ parties (eg. Pro-labor Democrats along with unions) absolutely do not support them (as pro-labor politicians and unions are, by definition, in bed together).

The government, especially with the current balance of power in congress and executive branch, won’t be ceding any power soon).

In the context of this thread, Orion and HH have consistently offered nothing but “government is the problem and unions protect teachers from government = there’s NOTHING else we can do because government is the enemy that won’t go away”. You’ve not addressed that at all.

Now, your turn: You’ve offered nothing to this discussion (and I’ve asked several times) for some alternative solutions to what happened in Rhode Island. Those teachers were fired because they refused to put in some more work. They were (on average) decently paid teachers in one of the worst performing schools in their state. Their boss needed more, their union wouldn’t budge, they lost their jobs.

299

[quote]Headhunter wrote:

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
(Those noble fighters against monopoly.)

[/quote]

That’s not their purpose. They are one gang fighting another gang. Their common enemy is the INDIVIDUAL, the individual human mind.

Haven’t you figured that out yet?
[/quote]

Fighting for more money, more security, more benefits, and less work: but not fighting against the monopoly itself.

If you had written “fighting against poor offers from the monopoly” or after the first, fifth, or maybe tenth criticism of your statement clarified that you meant fighting against poor remunerative offers but not against the monopoly itself, then there would have been no need for people to repeatedly point out that the teachers’ unions do not fight the monopoly itself.

300

[quote]SteelyD wrote:

In the context of this thread, Orion and HH have consistently offered nothing but “government is the problem and unions protect teachers from government = there’s NOTHING else we can do because government is the enemy that won’t go away”. You’ve not addressed that at all.

Now, your turn: You’ve offered nothing to this discussion [/quote]

Really? Nothing? If nothing else, I’d like to take some credit for adding “at risk” to the discussion.

Would you like merit-based pay? Want more charter schools or vouchers? Then we need to talk about some of the realities on the ground. That means we can’t ignore the problems of the inner city or rural districts. That means we can’t ONLY attack unions. That means we can’t simplify the problems to “take it back from the Feds!”

These are all ideas I brought to the discussion. So you’ll understand why I bowed out after I realized you thought I’ve “offered nothing to this discussion.”

PS While I agree with HH and Orion on some of the problems we face, I’d guess that I completely disagree on the solutions. So you might not want to lump me in with them. Also, honestly, I see HH as primarily a troll.