Cite?
No more than I can stop paying my taxes because I disagree with a court ruling, or a law that gets passed. But you know that.
Why do you think you should have any say over how another person spends the money they earned?
Well, here’s the ironic thing. They don’t have a say.
If you are a conservative teacher, you can’t say to the union, “Hey, I want you to stop using my dues to support Democrats. And while you are at it, stop wasting it litigating to keep pedophiles on the payroll!”
I would also argue if these guys are really earning their money if they are sitting in a rubber room or 20% of their pupils are functionally illiterate. I guess I come from the old school that if someone pays you, you’d better be producing tangible results.
I don’'t do cites. You guys pretend you didn’t see them when I do, so why make the effort?
But the notion of the "penitentiary"is a recent one. Before that, they just hanged the guy.
Good on ya! There is hope.
If “bad teachers” are really the enormous, systemic problem that is being alleged, how can we countenance having administrators who are NOT spending the majority of their time and attention rooting them out? What the hell else are they doing that is equivalent in importance?
Balance, schmalance, it does not take an act of god, it takes documented and sustainable charges. It is not acceptable to fire teachers based upon unsubstantiated charges whether those accusations are “child molestation” or “teaching heresy”.
I was once a high school teacher of biology and chemistry because I (cue starry eyes music) thought it was important. I left teaching because I found it impossible to raise a family on that income level. My colleagues at the time formed a typical bell curve, whether one measured their abilities as teachers, their commitment to education, or their hair styles. (Yes, I know this is an anecdote; sue me.) There were a lot of reasonably good teachers, and a few outliers at both fringes. I do not suggest that increasing salaries would have eliminated the fringes; that’s not how a distribution curve works. But I do maintain that increased salaries would have moved the curve. For one thing, it might have kept me in teaching 
Really? Can you please quote the passage in which I say that I’m counting on the world being brought near the brink of destruction? The only reason I’m asking is that I don’t recall saying that, so I’m hoping you can refresh my memory. Thank you so much.
My kid’s elementary school does it in SOME classrooms. They are having very good results. They started with a boys classroom - with - where they can get them - male teachers. They’ve added a girls classroom. Since they also provide co-ed classrooms, you can opt out
I have mixed feelings that they will eventually end up with “separate but not equal” - but the test scores have improved.
I’d do away with a lot of mainstreaming. Some of my kids remedial ed classmates spend four or five hours (out of seven) outside of the classroom. I don’t think the two or three hours they spend in the classroom is doing anyone much good. And it isn’t just the remedial kids - the G&T kids are being pulled constantly as well. Do less “teaching to the middle.”
I was shocked that my kids had the entire class taught out of the same math book and reading book at the same place. When I was a kid there were three math groups and three reading groups. That kept the advanced kids from having to hear the material five or six times - and let the kids having trouble keeping up hear it seven or eight times. (When I was a kid I spent time in an “open school” where elementary school was ‘independent study’ - you worked independently through units - being graded on quantity and quality of units finished. Finish decimals and ready to move to fractions - you just did it. Ah, the 70s, the heydey of the experimental school).
Poor administrators, having more important things to do than firing bad teachers. Fire those administrators.
As I said earlier, I don’t want to keep my job through union activism (FTR, in my state that’s a hilarious idea). I want to keep it through awesomeness. However, I do want my union dues to pay for legal aid if I face an unjust accusation or a vindictive principal. And I’m not sure I want my union to be in a position to refuse me that help if someone there decides they don’t think my case has merit. Rather, I’d like for them to be my advocates full-stop, and then I’d like for the arbiters, i.e., the administration, to make a good decision.
You seem to disagree. How do you think the union should phrase their policy for whom to support? Keep in mind that they will be operating with insufficient information: it’ll be extremely rare than the union person deciding whom to support will know with 100% certainty whether a given set of charges are true.
Finally, regarding your username, I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but you appear to be suffering a serious relapse.
Except in the two cases I cited, it wasn’t “unsubstantiated”. In the one case the teacher fathered a child on a student. In the other, the guy admitted he put his hands on the girl. In any event, it should not take years to resolve their cases, but that is exactly what happens. And if the administrators are having to go after these mutants with so much resources, with no progress why bother going after the guy who merely sleeps at his desk?
You know what, my mother was an art teacher at the Catholic school I went to (imagine how much trouble I got into when I played the class clown) and she did it for a lot less than what Union teachers make. The nuns were working for really nothing.
I think there are a lot of bad teachers who started out as good teachers, but the bad ones drag them down. Heck, I’ll admit it, humans are social creatures, and we conform.
I’m sorry, is there a Democratic policy of “No Pedophile Left Behind” where Democrats are fine with pedophiles in the schools?
This shouldn’t be a left-right thing. It is because the Democrats very cynically see the Teacher Unions as a source of money. I think everyone should want bad teachers to be encourged to seek other lines of work.
No. This whole pedophile meme was introduced by you as a way of demonizing unions. Nobody is pro-pedophile. They may be reluctant to pick up their pitchforks and torches and assail the unions, though. Most people would say, “fire the Pedophile and keep the union.” As to why the union is protecting this jerk – that’s why I wanted a story from a source other than the NY Post, which just doesn’t bother explaining things. The post sensationalizes and misrepresents stories to sell papers and do it with a wink. (They once gave me a good book review, though, so I forgive them).
This is where I have to bite my tongue not to LOL. If anyone is cynically playing this for political reasons, it is the right. They want a poster child for union corruption to do away with the unions. They want to do away with unions to lower wages and weaken labor. That’s it. It has nothing to do with improving schools.
Your assertion is demonstrably false.
Unions elect officers. They are democratic institutions. If enough people with a conservative bent were to get elected, and thus had the support of the membership, they could then set policy accordingly. Why do you think the situation is somehow different than that?
If you “don’'t do cites” then perhaps you’re in the wrong forum. Be prepared to be challenged on every assertion you make; this admission, it seems to me, is tantamount to admitting that you are just making shit up all the time.
No it’s just saying, I don’t waste my time on unproductive activities.
Well, first of all, there is a LAW that states that if you don’t like the candidates your union supports, you don’t have to support them.
http://mymassp.com/content/supreme_court_prohibits_union_campaign_withholding
Secondly, again, they work for us. They shouldn’t be dictating to us that we have to tolerate paying pedophile teachers.
But you see, they aren’t firing the pedophile. Heck, they aren’t even lowering the outrage level by quietly telling the guy to retire (he could have retired one year after the incident.) Instead, this guy keeps showing up at the Rubber Room (or he did because I think they got rid of them this year) as a big screw you to the
Really? What kind of stuff do you write? (Feel free to PM me so we don’t clog up the thread).
The real question should be, why is the Post the only newspaper reporting this. If it’s a story, and there is another side or angle, why aren’t the Times or the Daily News or the Observer reporting it?
I think the thing about a poster child is a poster child makes it more stark.
It’s not just getting rid of the pedophiles or even the bad teachers that are the problem. The Unions oppose ANY kind of reform. They oppose school choice. They oppose Charter Schools. The oppose Merit Pay.
Getting rid of the pedophile should be a no-brainer.
What a stupid thing to say, given that I’ve been saying he should have been fired. I’m seriously wondering if this idea is too complex for you to hold in your head all at once:
- Pedophiles should be fired; and
- Unions should advocate on behalf of their members.
If union advocacy prevents pedophiles from being fired, it’s because administration has something terribly wrong with it.
Close: rather, it’s a left-right thing because Republicans very cynically see the teacher unions as a source of money for their opposition, and so they’re trying to demonize the unions in order to hurt their opponents.
Actually, that’s not even close to a correct summary of the cite you provided. In fact, that article isn’t about a LAW at all, it’s about a recent DECISION. And that’s not even about, as you seem to think, the entire country, but only about a recent Michigan Supreme Court DECISION. And the decision had nothing to do with union members not wanting to contribute to union PACs; it has to do with whether or not government money can be used to support campaigns. Perhaps you should (re)read it, and then try and be more accurate when describing it’s contents. I mean, FFS, it’s all right there in just the 3rd sentence:
Secondly, unions don’t dictate. They negotiate. If you don’t like the terms that were agreed upon, perhaps you should work harder at convincing the voting public to stop electing the people who agree to those terms. That would be a more democratic, indeed, a more American way of dealing with what you see as a problem, rather than publicly stating that you don’t think working people should be able to determine what they want to spend their own money on.
I think back to my best teachers and find very few… what a shame… End Teachers Unions, End the Educational racism jobs program, return to the one room school with no weighty administration to oversee distributed politics, end progress at the dumbest student’s rate, retain the ability to fire teachers for any reason, let parents decide which teacher is best, concentration camps for those that change history or facts for political agendas, end Black History month that lasts all year, add Native Indian month in detail to explain how our Government really works with all historical genocidal facts, put shop, gardening, and technical subjects back as most important, fire all federal education employees, etc…make Native Indian month last all year to review how our government lives up to its treaty word. As a test subject, How many most simple, basic machines are there? If you did not answer 3, you were educated by the Government. answer- Inclined plane, Lever, and the Bicycle Pump. If you do not understand the last one, put your head in the sand and repeat the mantra you learned by rote. Dummy.
Too much firewater