# Teachers Strike. Seriously? Teachers, feel free to chime in here. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [January 11, 2005, 5:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/teachers-strike-seriously-teachers-feel-free-to-chime-in-here/284175 "2005-01-11T05:25:10Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 13
**Author:** ![ethanwinfield](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/96bed5/32.png) [@ethanwinfield](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ethanwinfield)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2005, 3:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/teachers-strike-seriously-teachers-feel-free-to-chime-in-here/284175/241 "2005-01-13T15:16:02Z")
What is this supply and demand concept? Let me see if I have this right–if the supply is greater than the demand, the cost goes down. But if the demand is greater than the supply, then the cost goes up. Is that the way it works IRL? Or just in theory? I’ve noticed a surplus of politicians in my area, and yet the cost of their labor hasn’t gone down any. It seems few of them ever run unopposed, thus indicating that there are more applicants than there are positions. If the supply of teachers continues to go down to the point of needing long-term subs in math positions or putting 40-50 kids in a room built for 25, what will happen? In theory the salary of qualified teachers should increase, but to do so would require an increase in taxes. ---
**Author:** ![Happy\_Lendervedder](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/happy_lendervedder/32/8488_2.png) [@Happy\_Lendervedder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Happy_Lendervedder)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2005, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/teachers-strike-seriously-teachers-feel-free-to-chime-in-here/284175/242 "2005-01-13T17:16:46Z")
> [@](#): > > Originally posted by SlyFrog > At this point everyone is either having fun being intentionally obtuse, their petty biases will not allow them to admit what was clearly written, or they honestly cannot comprehend what is written. Sooo, everyone’s an idiot but you? Well, if it makes you sleep better tonight… And you’ll notice the debate’s continued in a civil manner, no one’s been called a douchebag or asshole yet. That’s because, although people might not agree, when you offer respect, you get respect. Think about it, sparky. But onward and upward… > [@](#): > > Originally posted by Bill H. > But also, I think private school environment fosters an attitude where people work harder. Or are given the time and resources to do more. Teachers unions aren’t just about negotiating for more money and better benefits, it’s about getting smaller classes through staffing ratios. Obviously you can’t negotiate for more parental involvement, but not having this extra help, in addition to larger classes, is the main reason public school teachers are at more of a disadvantage. Doesn’t mean private teachers worker harder, per se. They’ve got more help and less students. And you know what? They’re probably mentally healthier than their public school counterparts as a result. Which brings us to pay… > [@](#): > > Well, I agree with this assessment in general. But “better” has no upper bound. Why not pay them $200k/year; you’re bound to get the very finest. The bigger issue is paying them what’s fair. And unionized public school wages are above wages dictated by supply and demand, and therefore unfairly high. No way. This is not the business world. I believe this has already been covered in this thread. Trying to bring education into world of basic supply-and-demand economics gets us ab-sol-lute-ly nowhere. Somebody earlier (I think **Cheesesteak** ) said that the people with purse strings know that many teachers will do the work no matter what, and administration uses this ‘higher calling syndrome’ to their advantage when negotiating. He’s right. They know they’ll maintain a decent _enough_ pool of teachers no matter what they toss at them for reimbursement and work conditions. They know at the end of the day, at the end of the year, for the most part, enough of these dedicated souls will suffer through anything because of the kids. This does nothing to _optimize_ the teacher pool, however. Public officials (from the very top on down to the districts) are putting the bottom line ahead of optimizing the teacher pool. If they put more resourses into teachers, maybe our public schools would offer a better, more quality education, on par with the privates. Anyway…Business people do not view their clients as a teacher views his or her students. If a stellar ad rep, or salesman, or broker leaves his job for financial or mental health/stress reasons, the company suffers, and his clients might wish he was still there, but so what? There’s no anguish. And if enough of these stellar people leave the company, the business folds. If a stellar teacher leaves his or her job for financial or mental health/stress reasons (which happens a lot), the _school_ suffers, and the _kids_ pay the price. If enough of these stellar teachers leave, the consequences are a lot worse than if a business folds. Forget supply and demand, it does not work here. There’s too much supply-and-demand economics in it right now, and that’s one reason public schools (and public school students) are hurting. Offer more, you’ll get more. From the looks of a couple posts in this thread, good teachers are even leaving the country to get more respect, better conditions and a better lifestyle. What’s it gonna take to make people realize that we have to offer our teachers _more_ to attract them to, and keep them teaching in, our public schools? ---
**Author:** ![Happy\_Lendervedder](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/happy_lendervedder/32/8488_2.png) [@Happy\_Lendervedder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Happy_Lendervedder)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2005, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/teachers-strike-seriously-teachers-feel-free-to-chime-in-here/284175/243 "2005-01-13T17:27:01Z")
> [@](#): > > Originally posted by SlyFrog > At this point everyone is either having fun being intentionally obtuse, their petty biases will not allow them to admit what was clearly written, or they honestly cannot comprehend what is written. Sooo, everyone’s an idiot but you? Well, if it makes you sleep better tonight… And you’ll notice the debate’s continued in a civil manner, no one’s been called a douchebag or asshole yet. That’s because, although people might not agree, when you offer respect, you get respect. Think about it, sparky. > [@](#): > > Originally posted by Bill H. > But also, I think private school environment fosters an attitude where people work harder. Or are given the time and resources to do more. Teachers unions aren’t just about negotiating for more money and better benefits, it’s about getting smaller classes through staffing ratios. Obviously you can’t negotiate for more parental involvement, but not having this extra help, in addition to larger classes, is the main reason public school teachers are at more of a disadvantage. Doesn’t mean private teachers worker harder, per se. They’ve got more help and less students. And you know what? They’re probably mentally healthier than their public school counterparts as a result. Which brings us to pay… > [@](#): > > Well, I agree with this assessment in general. But “better” has no upper bound. Why not pay them $200k/year; you’re bound to get the very finest. The bigger issue is paying them what’s fair. And unionized public school wages are above wages dictated by supply and demand, and therefore unfairly high. No way. This is not the business world. I believe this has already been covered in this thread. Trying to bring education into world of basic supply-and-demand economics gets us ab-sol-lute-ly nowhere. Somebody earlier (I think **Cheesesteak** said that the people with purse strings know that many teachers will do the work no matter what, and administration uses this ‘higher calling syndrome’ to their advantage when negotiating. He’s right. They know they’ll maintain a decent _enough_ pool of teachers no matter what they toss at them for reimbursement and work conditions. They know at the end of the day, at the end of the year, for the most part, enough of these dedicated souls will suffer through anything because of the kids. This does nothing to _optimize_ the teacher pool, however. Public officials (from the very top on down to the districts) are putting the bottom line ahead of optimizing the teacher pool. If they put more resourses into teachers, maybe our public schools would offer a better, more quality education, on par with the privates. Anyway…Business people do not view their clients as a teacher views his or her students. If a stellar ad rep, or salesman, or broker leaves his job for financial or mental health/stress reasons, the company suffers, and his clients might wish he was still there, but so what? There’s no anguish. Big deal, that’s business. If a stellar teacher leaves his or her job for financial or mental health/stress reasons (which happens a lot), the _school_ suffers, and the _kids_ pay the price. When objectives are not being met in a business, money is not being made. When objectives are not being met in the schools, kids are not getting educated. The business world and world of education are not comparable, they’re apples and oranges. Government agencies are not in it to make a profit, they’re there to serve the public. The public is not being served in many of our public schools. Forget supply and demand, it does not work here. There’s too much supply-and-demand economics in it right now, and that’s one reason public schools (and public school students) are hurting. Offer more, you’ll get more. From the looks of a couple posts in this thread, good teachers are even leaving the country to get more respect, better conditions and a better lifestyle. What’s it gonna take to make people realize that we have to offer our teachers _more_ to attract them to, and keep them teaching in, our public schools? ---
**Author:** ![Happy\_Lendervedder](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/happy_lendervedder/32/8488_2.png) [@Happy\_Lendervedder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Happy_Lendervedder)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2005, 5:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/teachers-strike-seriously-teachers-feel-free-to-chime-in-here/284175/244 "2005-01-13T17:32:16Z")
Sorry for the double post, the sumbitch kept timing out. Thank heavens for copy and paste. I added stuff to the second one, so that’s the one you should pay attention to. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Bill\_H](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a5b964/32.png) [@Bill\_H](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bill_H)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2005, 5:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/teachers-strike-seriously-teachers-feel-free-to-chime-in-here/284175/245 "2005-01-13T17:48:12Z")
**GLWasteful** wrote > [@](#): > > Well, what you claim is competition is not. I claim that private schools compete amongst themselves and with public schools for the dollars of parents. It is competition. Parents make a choice like they do for any other product or service. > [@](#): > > Also, private schools don’t have to provide educations and appliances for special education students, thereby freeing up a whole helluva lot of money that can be spent on, well, pretty much anything. This is true. I debate the “whole helluva a lot of money” part, but this is a good point. > [@](#): > > Tell you what: You try teaching for a time, then come back and tell us all about those teachers who are making more money than they deserve. And which job is harder. Sure, you’d have trouble, but I’ll wager that you’d also respect them far more than you do right now. First off, they get plenty of respect from me, and as I described earlier they get my help as well. Just ten minutes ago, I helped in one class with a quick math lesson, and did some fishtank maintenance in another. Second off, I’ll be the first to admit that I’d have trouble doing a teachers job. But that doesn’t change my opinion – an opinion that’s based on seeing first hand what teachers do from several sources, and holding numerous jobs to compare them to – that a public school teachers job is not the most demanding job out there, and is actually pretty cush in many ways. However, all that is really secondary to the question at hand, notably whether teachers are paid enough or too much, and whether they should be able to strike. Supply and Demand work for everybody else, but teachers are paid above what the market bears. Teachers wages are artificially high due to their unions and the unreasonable stick (the strike) that unions wield. > [@](#): > > “When the day is over, it’s over.”? Have you read any of the posts on this thread? I’ve read; I’ve talked to teachers; I’ve worked with teachers. What I said is how I see it. A teachers job is not the sort of job you worry about at night, concerned about deadlines weeks or months or years out. > [@](#): > > Brother, you ain’t fortunate. You’re outright blessed. Teachers with that sort of support oughta be slipping you furtive sexual favors. We’re lucky, yes. I don’t get **that** lucky though. > [@](#): > > Although I’m kinda curious what you mean when you say, “. . .there’s a lot of private money that goes into the public schools.” Do you mean that parents slip teachers a fifty when no one’s looking? That tax rates are higher? I’m trying to imagine such a thing. There are two organizations that support the schools in our area. One is the PTA, which I’m sure most areas have as well. But we also have a private organization in our area called the Saratoga Education Foundation ([http://www.saratoga-sef.org/](http://www.saratoga-sef.org/)), that raises money (alot of money; over $1m this school year) and spends it on the schools in the area. They have paid full teachers salaries, bought materials, built play structures, etc. I should mention that because our school is in a well-to-do area, that the state actually pays less (alot less) than they do for schools in poorer areas. Alot of people in the area are upset about that unfairness, but personally I think it’s a good thing, that poorer areas should get a lot more education money than they do. > [@](#): > > Maybe because they know that they can be shown the door because they did something that the school doesn’t care for? Exactly. I’m sorry to put it so bluntly, but a little fear that if you don’t perform you won’t have a job is a good thing in my book. Funny, that brought back a memory: in 7th grade, a fellow student was giving a teacher some lip and said something to the effect that he would get her fired. She responded that she couldn’t be fired because she had tenure. Granted, the student was a jerk, but what she said really stuck in my mind, enough so that I researched what it meant and a bit into free markets. Now that I’m the one shelling out tax money the whole concept of tenure really bugs me. ---
**Author:** ![Bill\_H](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a5b964/32.png) [@Bill\_H](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bill_H)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2005, 6:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/teachers-strike-seriously-teachers-feel-free-to-chime-in-here/284175/246 "2005-01-13T18:05:24Z")
**Happy Lendervedder** wrote > [@](#): > > When objectives are not being met in a business, money is not being made. When objectives are not being met in the schools, kids are not getting educated. Teachers have an important role in our society, yes. But they’re really not that much more important than everyone else. They’re really not that much less expendable than any one else. If a teacher is lost and the kids get a replacement teacher for the remainder of the year, it’s not the end of the world that you’re making it out to be. And they’re not so important that they need to be paid above market rates. I’m sorry. Teachers are important. But they’re not **that** important. ---
**Author:** ![Scumpup](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ce73a5/32.png) [@Scumpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scumpup)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2005, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/teachers-strike-seriously-teachers-feel-free-to-chime-in-here/284175/247 "2005-01-13T18:09:27Z")
> [@](#): > > She responded that she couldn’t be fired because she had tenure. She didn’t understand what tenure means, then. Lots of people have some mistaken ideas what tenure in a public school system means. It does not mean that the teacher cannot be fired. In Pennsylvania, tenure means that you cannot be fired for no reason and without due process. Here, a teacher can be fired for any of the following: Inadequate Performance Neglect of Duty Failure to Fullfill the Statutory Duties of a Teacher Insubordination Failure to Comply with Reasonable Requirements of the Board Immorality Use of Alcohol and Drugs Conviction of a Felony or a Crime Involving Moral Turpitude False Application Information Incapacity Failure to Keep Certificate Current Certificate Revoked When a schoolboard wishes to terminate a teacher for any of the above, due process must be followed. They can’t simply send you a letter saying “you’re fired for \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_.” I suspect the teacher in your anecdote knew all this and was simply indicating to the kid “I know what I can be fired for and you ain’t it.” I’m not aware of any school system where tenure means a teacher simply can’t be fired. ---
**Author:** ![Bill\_H](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a5b964/32.png) [@Bill\_H](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bill_H)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2005, 6:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/teachers-strike-seriously-teachers-feel-free-to-chime-in-here/284175/248 "2005-01-13T18:15:51Z")
**Scumpup** wrote > [@](#): > > I suspect the teacher in your anecdote knew all this and was simply indicating to the kid “I know what I can be fired for and you ain’t it.” I’m sure she did. I also knew what she meant and what it meant. But the most important aspect of tenure isn’t on the list of things you mentioned. The most important aspect of tenure is that it is a system that puts those with tenure less prone to being laid off than those without. And that’s wrong. Lay offs are sad all around, but when one is necessary, the least qualified teacher should go. Not the one that’s been there the longest. ---
**Author:** ![vivalostwages](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/d07c76/32.png) [@vivalostwages](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/vivalostwages)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2005, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/teachers-strike-seriously-teachers-feel-free-to-chime-in-here/284175/249 "2005-01-13T18:18:02Z")
> [@Happy Lendervedder](#): > > Sooo, everyone’s an idiot but you? Well, if it makes you sleep better tonight… > > And you’ll notice the debate’s continued in a civil manner, no one’s been called a douchebag or asshole yet. That’s because, although people might not agree, when you offer respect, you get respect. Think about it, sparky. > > Or are given the time and resources to do more. Teachers unions aren’t just about negotiating for more money and better benefits, it’s about getting smaller classes through staffing ratios. Obviously you can’t negotiate for more parental involvement, but not having this extra help, in addition to larger classes, is the main reason public school teachers are at more of a disadvantage. Doesn’t mean private teachers worker harder, per se. They’ve got more help and less students. And you know what? They’re probably mentally healthier than their public school counterparts as a result. > > Which brings us to pay… > > No way. This is not the business world. I believe this has already been covered in this thread. Trying to bring education into world of basic supply-and-demand economics gets us ab-sol-lute-ly nowhere. > > Somebody earlier (I think **Cheesesteak** said that the people with purse strings know that many teachers will do the work no matter what, and administration uses this ‘higher calling syndrome’ to their advantage when negotiating. He’s right. They know they’ll maintain a decent _enough_ pool of teachers no matter what they toss at them for reimbursement and work conditions. They know at the end of the day, at the end of the year, for the most part, enough of these dedicated souls will suffer through anything because of the kids. This does nothing to _optimize_ the teacher pool, however. Public officials (from the very top on down to the districts) are putting the bottom line ahead of optimizing the teacher pool. If they put more resourses into teachers, maybe our public schools would offer a better, more quality education, on par with the privates. > > Anyway…Business people do not view their clients as a teacher views his or her students. If a stellar ad rep, or salesman, or broker leaves his job for financial or mental health/stress reasons, the company suffers, and his clients might wish he was still there, but so what? There’s no anguish. Big deal, that’s business. If a stellar teacher leaves his or her job for financial or mental health/stress reasons (which happens a lot), the _school_ suffers, and the _kids_ pay the price. > > When objectives are not being met in a business, money is not being made. When objectives are not being met in the schools, kids are not getting educated. > > The business world and world of education are not comparable, they’re apples and oranges. Government agencies are not in it to make a profit, they’re there to serve the public. The public is not being served in many of our public schools. > > Forget supply and demand, it does not work here. There’s too much supply-and-demand economics in it right now, and that’s one reason public schools (and public school students) are hurting. Offer more, you’ll get more. From the looks of a couple posts in this thread, good teachers are even leaving the country to get more respect, better conditions and a better lifestyle. > > What’s it gonna take to make people realize that we have to offer our teachers _more_ to attract them to, and keep them teaching in, our public schools? Precisely. Miserable, angry, burned-out teachers or professors cannot provide quality education. Then they either leave the profession (which they probably excelled in at one time) or else continue the downward spiral. I’ve seen colleagues in higher ed work on two to four campuses per semester, driving their lives away as freeway flyers, because they can’t make ends meet on a p/t’s hourly rate if they teach on only one campus that doesn’t pay much. They cannot serve their students well if they are scrambling and juggling all the time. For those who say, “Well, you should have known what you were getting into,” I’d respond, “I wish I had. I wish I’d known that the districts would rather keep a huge, flexible, revolving-door pool of part-timers rather than hire more full-timers. I wish I’d known that it can take years to negotiate anything at all.” I’m fortunate to be able to manage at just one campus now, and to be able to give my full energy and attention to students. Our union\* spends a great deal of time trying to negotiate things that will benefit students as well as faculty. \*I would also point out here that the phrase “the teachers’ union” should not be used to refer to every union out there and to tar them all with the same brush. Some are good, some are bad, some are so-so. ---
**Author:** ![Scumpup](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ce73a5/32.png) [@Scumpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scumpup)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2005, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/teachers-strike-seriously-teachers-feel-free-to-chime-in-here/284175/250 "2005-01-13T18:27:55Z")
> [@Bill H.](#): > > **Scumpup** wrote > > I’m sure she did. I also knew what she meant and what it meant. But the most important aspect of tenure isn’t on the list of things you mentioned. > > The most important aspect of tenure is that it is a system that puts those with tenure less prone to being laid off than those without. > > And that’s wrong. Lay offs are sad all around, but when one is necessary, the least qualified teacher should go. Not the one that’s been there the longest. Tenure doesn’t dictate who loses his job during a staff reduction. That is a matter of seniority. Tenure and seniority aren’t the same thing. During a staff reduction, the least senior teacher is the one to be furloughed. Whether that teacher has tenure or not doesn’t matter. When I was layed off, I was least senior science teacher and didn’t have tenure. Two other teachers were layed off with me and, IIRC, at least one of them had tenure. ---
**Author:** ![Happy\_Lendervedder](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/happy_lendervedder/32/8488_2.png) [@Happy\_Lendervedder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Happy_Lendervedder)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2005, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/teachers-strike-seriously-teachers-feel-free-to-chime-in-here/284175/251 "2005-01-13T18:31:31Z")
> [@](#): > > But they’re really not that much more important than everyone else. But they role they play is. A society with top-notch stock brokers, or businessmen, or garbage men, or atheletes, or mailmen, or librarians, or lawyers is not going to be as good or intelligent or enriched without top-notch teachers. And how do you think those other professions got to be top-notch? They were taught, by teachers, from K through whatever their highest educational level was. This might be, however, the point where we have to agree to disagree. ---
**Author:** ![Bill\_H](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a5b964/32.png) [@Bill\_H](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bill_H)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2005, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/teachers-strike-seriously-teachers-feel-free-to-chime-in-here/284175/252 "2005-01-13T19:01:24Z")
**Scumpup** wrote > [@](#): > > Tenure doesn’t dictate who loses his job during a staff reduction. That is a matter of seniority. Tenure and seniority aren’t the same thing. During a staff reduction, the least senior teacher is the one to be furloughed. Whether that teacher has tenure or not doesn’t matter. > > When I was layed off, I was least senior science teacher and didn’t have tenure. Two other teachers were layed off with me and, IIRC, at least one of them had tenure. Fair enough. The system of seniority, as fought for and won by the teachers unions is wrong and a disservice to our society. ---
**Author:** ![Scumpup](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ce73a5/32.png) [@Scumpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scumpup)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2005, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/teachers-strike-seriously-teachers-feel-free-to-chime-in-here/284175/253 "2005-01-13T19:04:44Z")
> [@Bill H.](#): > > **Scumpup** wrote > > The system of seniority, as fought for and won by the teachers unions is wrong and a disservice to our society. What would you propose as a replacement? ---
**Author:** ![Bill\_H](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a5b964/32.png) [@Bill\_H](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bill_H)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2005, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/teachers-strike-seriously-teachers-feel-free-to-chime-in-here/284175/254 "2005-01-13T19:17:59Z")
**Happy Lendervedder** wrote > [@](#): > > But the role they play is (“much more important than everyone else”). A society with top-notch stock brokers, or businessmen, or garbage men, or atheletes, or mailmen, or librarians, or lawyers is not going to be as good or intelligent or enriched without top-notch teachers. Who’s more important, a teacher or a policeman or a CEO or a movie star? I dunno. How do you measure such a thing? You could poll everyone, I suppose. But I do know who’s more valuable. That’s not as subjective; we already have a way to measure it. We just compare what the job pays. Sad to say, society ranks movie star as more valuable than teacher. Appropriate? I dunno. Just and Fair? Absolutely. The market spoke, and the market holds no bias. And the market isn’t some nebulous concept; it’s all of us speaking in harmony with our money. > [@](#): > > And how do you think those other professions got to be top-notch? They were taught, by teachers, from K through whatever their highest educational level was. Teachers are very important, you’ll get no argument from me there. But to hold them above the standards of everyone else isn’t reasonable. I’m sorry, it’s not. Also, in fairness, “top-notch” people start off with an education, true. But what really got them to be “top-notch” wasn’t the quality of their kindergarten teacher as you say. Any other kindergarten teacher or none at all, and it’s highly likely they would’ve ended up just as top-notch. Top-notch people get their high notchediness after they leave the education system, in the things they do later. > [@](#): > > This might be, however, the point where we have to agree to disagree. Fair enough. ---
**Author:** ![Bill\_H](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a5b964/32.png) [@Bill\_H](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bill_H)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2005, 7:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/teachers-strike-seriously-teachers-feel-free-to-chime-in-here/284175/255 "2005-01-13T19:24:34Z")
**Scumpup** wrote > [@](#): > > What would you propose as a replacement? Well, I think it should be based on ability. Granted, that’s not a pure thing to measure, but you can try your best. You can measure such things as: - grades of students on some formalized test - improvement of students on some formalized test - grade of teacher on some formalized test - rating as given by peer teachers - rating as given by parents - rating as given by students - extra points for leadership sorts of things with peer teachers - extra points for relevant extra curricular sorts of things The goal should be to keep the best teachers and eliminate the worst. The process of ranking by seniority does not do this. ---
**Author:** ![GLWasteful](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/f05b48/32.png) [@GLWasteful](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GLWasteful)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2005, 11:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/teachers-strike-seriously-teachers-feel-free-to-chime-in-here/284175/256 "2005-01-13T23:26:47Z")
**BillH** : No. What you refer to as “competition” is one organization (public schools) trying to out do another (private schools). As I pointed out, private schools can refuse to accept anybody that they want to. Especially special education kids. Public schools, on the other hand, **must** accept **every** student that shows up with their paperwork in order. Are you intellectually honest enough to see that this is not competition in any meaningful sense of the word? Plus, private schools can (and quite often do) cut their losses with a given student who has become a bit of a behavior issue. Public schools have to document everything that this same student does for some time before they are able to expel him (or, her, I’m nothing if not flexible). Plus, when you write: > [@](#): > > I claim that private schools compete amongst themselves and with public schools for the dollars of parents. You are either willfully obtuse, or you have no concept whatsoever of how public schools are financed. > [@](#): > > First off, they get plenty of respect from me, and as I described earlier they get my help as well. Just ten minutes ago, I helped in one class with a quick math lesson, and did some fishtank maintenance in another. Good on you. I can tell you, though, that what you consider “respect” is not considered the same by a single other teacher that I have ever known in my life. > [@](#): > > Second off, I’ll be the first to admit that I’d have trouble doing a teachers job. Yeah. So would I. Difference being, I see daily what being a teacher is all about. You don’t. So g’wan, give it a try. Like I said, you would develop a healthy respect for what they do. And this “respect”, unlike that referenced above, would adhere to a definition that teachers could get behind. > [@](#): > > But that doesn’t change my opinion – an opinion that’s based on seeing first hand what teachers do from several sources. . . What sources? > [@](#): > > and holding numerous jobs to compare them to Name one job that you think is comparable to that of a teacher. > [@](#): > > that a public school teachers job is not the most demanding job out there, and is actually pretty cush in many ways. “Cushy” in what ways? > [@](#): > > Supply and Demand work for everybody else, but teachers are paid above what the market bears. Once more, the market doesn’t contain the answers to everything. Sounds like you have a really difficult time with this. > [@](#): > > Teachers wages are artificially high due to their unions and the unreasonable stick (the strike) that unions wield. Bullshit. As has been pointed out previously (and I’m as surprised as anyone that this thread has gone on as long as it has): teachers don’t strike for the hell of it. And if you think that they do, you **are** being much thicker than is necessary. > [@](#): > > I’ve read; I’ve talked to teachers; I’ve worked with teachers. No, you haven’t. > [@](#): > > A teachers job is not the sort of job you worry about at night, concerned about deadlines weeks or months or years out. Yes it is. Deadlines from way out? No, not so much. Ongoing concern for a kid that is on the knife’s edge? You betcher ass. Worry about what might happen to a given child in the future? Absolutely. Again, you’ve not picked up a damned thing. Not from this thread. Nor from any casual contact you may have had with teachers in your life. > [@](#): > > What I said is how I see it. And therein lies the problem. Did you get the crap beat out of you by a teacher when you were a wee lad? Were **you** the smart-ass who was told he couldn’t get the teacher fired? I figure it’s gotta be something along these lines. > [@](#): > > There are two organizations that support the schools in our area. One is the PTA, which I’m sure most areas have as well. But we also have a private organization in our area called the Saratoga Education Foundation ([http://www.saratoga-sef.org/](http://www.saratoga-sef.org/)), that raises money (alot of money; over $1m this school year) and spends it on the schools in the area. They have paid full teachers salaries, bought materials, built play structures, etc. I know teachers who would blow you in Macy’s front window for that sort of support. > [@](#): > > I’m sorry to put it so bluntly, but a little fear that if you don’t perform you won’t have a job is a good thing in my book. No, you’re not. False modesty is not becoming from you. And I was specifically thinking of private schools that have fired teachers because they went out for a drink (and tipped miserably, sheesh! I used to despise teachers when I waited tables). > [@](#): > > You can measure such things as: > > - grades of students on some formalized test > - improvement of students on some formalized test > - grade of teacher on some formalized test > - rating as given by peer teachers > - rating as given by parents > - rating as given by students > - extra points for leadership sorts of things with peer teachers > - extra points for relevant extra curricular sorts of things So, what happens when you teach special-ed? How does that formalized test work then? And how can you show improvement when you have a classroom full of kids who have plateaued? “Grade of teacher on some formalized test”? Do you know what someone goes through to become certified? The continuing education required? “Peer teachers”? I got no problem with this. “Parents”? Here I gotta problem. See, too many parents are as ignorant as you are about what a teacher does. “Students”? Man, I woulda wished for such when I was in public schools. Problem was, too many of those teachers I despised at the time were the best damned teachers I ever had. “Extra points for extracurriculars”? You are outta your cotton-pickin’ mind, boychik. “Mrs. Smith directed the school play, so she gets 10 extra points.” Oh, you’re precious. > [@](#): > > The goal should be to keep the best teachers and eliminate the worst. The process of ranking by seniority does not do this. And neither does **your** idea of how things oughta be. “Extracurriculars”. Heh. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2005, 11:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/teachers-strike-seriously-teachers-feel-free-to-chime-in-here/284175/257 "2005-01-13T23:43:03Z")
> [@Bill H.](#): > > You can measure such things as: > > - grades of students on some formalized test > - improvement of students on some formalized test > - grade of teacher on some formalized test Actually **Bill** , on this point you’re wrong too. Again I can furnish you with literally hundreds of journal articles (if your inbox can take it) about how standardized/high-stakes-testing is probably one of the greatest problems facing public schools today. ---
**Author:** ![Bill\_H](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a5b964/32.png) [@Bill\_H](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bill_H)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2005, 7:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/teachers-strike-seriously-teachers-feel-free-to-chime-in-here/284175/258 "2005-01-14T07:11:20Z")
**GLWasteful** wrote > [@](#): > > You are either willfully obtuse, or you have no concept whatsoever of how public schools are financed. (referring to the statement “I claim that private schools compete amongst themselves and with public schools for the dollars of parents.”) I don’t know how to put it any plainer than I have. Private schools compete for students. Public schools do not. Competition makes for higher quality. Do you perhaps not know the meaning of the word? Here it is: > [@](#): > > Compete for something; engage in a contest; measure oneself against others Private schools are forced to engage in a contest where the winner gets the students and the associated dollars. Public schools do not. > [@](#): > > Yeah. So would I (have trouble doing a teacher’s job). Difference being, I see daily what being a teacher is all about. You don’t. So g’wan, give it a try. Like I said, you would develop a healthy respect for what they do. I’m sorry; did you just say that you haven’t taught either? Then you have no business telling me that I can’t know how hard their job is without living it. And if on the off chance you’re right that I can’t know, then you have no business defending their position when by your own logic, you don’t know how hard their job is! > [@](#): > > “Cushy” in what ways? Well, the most obvious and prominent is that they have huge and numerous vacation breaks. > [@](#): > > Once more, the market doesn’t contain the answers to everything. Sounds like you have a really difficult time with this. I don’t know how to break this to you, but saying this really demeans your position. It’s the equivalent of looking at mathematical problem and saying “math doesn’t hold the answers to everything”. Basic economic theory isn’t some fuzzy thing you can wave away. And trying to do so really makes one sound silly. > [@](#): > > As has been pointed out previously (and I’m as surprised as anyone that this thread has gone on as long as it has): teachers don’t strike for the hell of it. Duh. they strike to derive unfair advantages for their members. > [@](#): > > No, you haven’t (read, talked to teachers, worked with teachers). Uh, ok. Whatever you say, pal. ---
**Author:** ![Bill\_H](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a5b964/32.png) [@Bill\_H](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bill_H)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2005, 7:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/teachers-strike-seriously-teachers-feel-free-to-chime-in-here/284175/259 "2005-01-14T07:17:25Z")
**FinnAgain** wrote > [@](#): > > Actually Bill, on this point you’re wrong too. Again I can furnish you with literally hundreds of journal articles (if your inbox can take it) about how standardized/high-stakes-testing is probably one of the greatest problems facing public schools today. Forgive me for not having the time to parse through these hundreds of journal articles. However, I am very interested. Please summarize the problem(s) with my suggestion. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2005, 10:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/teachers-strike-seriously-teachers-feel-free-to-chime-in-here/284175/260 "2005-01-14T10:11:08Z")
> [@Bill H.](#): > > Please summarize the problem(s) with my suggestion. Not all that much to summarize. Standardized tests are one of the least effective means of gagueing student progress and teaching to the test is one of the worst practices. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/teachers-strike-seriously-teachers-feel-free-to-chime-in-here/284175.md?page=12) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/teachers-strike-seriously-teachers-feel-free-to-chime-in-here/284175.md?page=14)