Any comments/solidarity on the Chicago Teacher Strike?

Fuck. Don't you dare get this thread highjacked by some current event opinion and hyperbole landslide. We're talking about bigger things, here.

So you're saying a teacher strike in the 3rd largest district is not part of "the problem with education in america"?

They are only asking for a 16% raise. That's not so much in the grand scheme of things.

I absolutely am, actually. I fundamentally disagree with large portions of the Chicago union's cause, as well as their actions (I never joined the union, myself). Though a few of their non-salary complaints do register with me as worthy of discussion, I don't think they will accomplish anything of long term significance, and their actions only serve to further isolate teachers from the voting public.

That said, the notion that teacher's unions are a significant part of the problem fails for several reasons. Chief among these is its most basic premise: that teacher's unions hurt education by preventing the firing of bad teachers....a statement akin to saying that I could build my house out of farts and cherries if only the goddamn construction crew wasn't unionized.

Your issue with events like the one in Chicago is about unionization and about education as a department, an organization....not about education as an event, as something that happens (or should be happening) and that can be encouraged or fostered and directed. As such, addressing that issue is never going to solve the actual problem being faced. The actual problem is that you can't build a house out of farts and cherries. The problem is that we're using the wrong tools, the wrong ideas, mandating the wrong policies. It's not that we're using the wrong crew. A half a million amazing and gifted teachers using this system and this pedagogy would still fail to produce a nation of graduates who were ready for the world they're about to face. It'd be wasted talent...it IS wasted talent, right here and now. It's like putting ace pilots in a plane that has one wing missing and a control panel consisting of a dimmer switch and two mute buttons...then sitting back, and thinking to yourself how great that plane's gonna fly now that you finally found the right crew.

I'm not saying don't talk about the Chicago thing. By all means. Just create a separate thread for it. Please. I'll come visit you there. I really will. But if you're going to be here, now, I'd very much appreciate it if you would go back over the last few pages of dialog and respond to that, instead, because I think it's a thousand times more valuable in terms of addressing the issue of education.

I think you miss the importance of what professional organizations do versus what unions do. Teachers want to unionize so be, but I'll place them on the same level as other other unions such as municipal garbage crews. Teachers want to step up to the plate and be professionals and be accountable to their own profession, I'll treat them like professionals. As it is, I take it on a case by case basis.

I don't go into my place of work and try to dictate how I'll work or decide which policies I'll follow. I'm a professional, I'll only work where my skills are appreciated and valued. Being unionized isn't the be all and end all of the education problem but it is certainly part of the problem.

I think you underestimate the importance of farts and cherries....especially as house-building materials.

Like I said, I'll gladly have a conversation about unions in education, and I think you'll find that I'm not in total disagreement with you...I'm just not gonna talk about it in this thread. I'll just keep right on photobombing it with more important things.

While I am waiting to read McP's examples...




One could argue (I would) that professionals are well within their rights to attempt to dictate the conditions under which they can and should work/be evaluated/be compensated. That their status as professionals should entitle them to it, even.

The idea behind unionization is that workers and management are equal stakeholders in an organization, and that as a result they should each have a voice in determining the working conditions that govern that organization.

It's easy to just assume that the hostility teachers have to standardized testing is that the bad ones are afraid of losing their jobs. But it is also possible (and I would suspect more probable) that the opposition to testing comes from professional opposition to the use and efficacy of testing, especially as the primary measure of teacher competence. I know plenty of excellent teachers who oppose it for those reasons. My understanding is that the Chicago union was prepared to support testing counting as 25% of their performance. They are balking at the 40%, which is well above the national average, and also risky given how controversial and untested the efficacy and accuracy of a testing regime is.

(I am not against the idea of merit pay in theory, although I don't know how to necessarily measure it in practice, and I am in strong favor of increasing the ability of districts to fire bad teachers, although again I'm not sure what the safest way to measure that is)

Outlined and started.
I sometimes find I have to invest as much energy in being succinct about this stuff as I do in communicating the message. I'll try and finish it up tomorrow. I have a few other things lying around I thought I might include, as well.

that wasn't meant to be a hurry up--it was more a 'until I have this to talk about I'll respond to that union thing'

To be fair, it's not just teacher unions that I'm against but any form of civil servant unionizing. If Ford workers want to unionize and then go on strike, I can buy a Chevy. If public school teachers go on strike, I face a heavy financial penalty for going elsewhere for education. If the DMV clerics go on strike the government has barred me from getting those services anywhere. There is a world of difference between private sector employees unionizing and public sector employees doing the same.

Adding to that, I think that unionizing demeans the profession of teaching. Unions are just about as staunchly against change in the workplace as anyone could be and they loathe the idea of efficiency. Farts and cherry stems will remain mainstays of the education field for far longer under a unionized work force than a professional workforce.

double post

if people are that concerned about teaching as a profession than they should be paid like professionals. They're not. At least the ones who aren't unionized aren't. My first teaching job was non unionized. It was a wealthy private school. I made 19,000 a year.

You're right that civil service unions are trickier than unions in private industry, and I'm always made uneasy by this. On the other hand, without the unions the odds that voters will voluntarily pony up the money to pay them competitive salaries, benefits, etc. are slim. If we could be relied on to do that public funding for education would be much more equitably distributed, and more generous than it is.

I believe Teacher's Unions are powerful in way other civil service unions, like say Postal Workers, are not. If the mail doesn't get delivered or garbage doesn't get picked up, that's just a temporary inconvenience. Every day our kids are not in schools does damage to them and causes ripples throughout the economy. So not only do they benefit from a what amounts to a government controlled monopoly, their members control and influence the most vulnerable and important part of our society and cause damage to already struggling adults like low-income single parents.

I am sympathetic to public school teachers. I know they put up with unimaginable sh*t from administrators, parents, and bureaucrats, but the moment they start impacting our children's future by striking during the school year, most of that sympathy goes away.

yeah like I said, it's tough. The costs of a strike are very high, but the profession does need the respect of the union, since we've clearly demonstrated time and time again that we will not treat teachers properly unless we're MADE to treat them properly.

Complaining what a career pays is stupid. It takes about 30 seconds to google search salary expectations prior to university. It's fine to think you're underpaid. But in most professions if you think you're underpaid you do one of a couple things; 1. look for another job that pays more, 2. make your case to your employer that you are of more value than you're paid, 3. become more proficient at your job and then ask for a raise to match your productivity gains, 4. quit and change careers. No one owes you a lifetime job as a teacher at the salary of your preference.

Unionizing and holding kids education at financial education should be and is viewed as a type of extortion. A form of bullying perpetuated by the very people paid to teach kids not to bully.

What makes you think that teachers are so special that they will not be paid correctly if they treated themselves as professionals. I'm quite sure the city CPA's are paid a fair wage. Same for city engineers. Same for every consultant hired. In some part teachers get viewed as a kin to garbage oickers because teachers have out themselves in that position by unionizing rather than going the professional association direction.

If you want to be treated with more respect, put yourself in a more respectable position. I think good teachers are underpaid and poor teachers vastly overpaid. Every poor teacher kept is a drag on all salaries. Because while I may not mind paying you (a good teacher) $XX, there's no way in hell I'm paying the bad teacher that same amount. Act like a profession and help weed out your own bad apples. Stop making it an adversarial process to get rid of dead wood. This may be a microscopic part of the actual problem but perceptually it is a big black eye on teachers and works against the esteem citizens have for teaching, the value we place on teaching and impinges on the professionalism that teachers should have.

Teachers start out decently educated and probably highly motivated. Has your union improved either of those for you? Every good teacher I know thinks their union is an impediment.

Is there anyway this has a positive ending?

I just kind of see this as not working for a few months losing all that salary and then coming back to the same thing. How can they possibly win?


The economy sucks, and it's not getting better for a while.... maybe a long while.

My problem ultimately with Merit Based pay for Teachers is that how do you rate them and who is doing the rating? How is it calculated?

Teachers are hardly the only influence and they may not even be the largest influence in their students educational lives.

What would it mean for Special Needs Teachers for instance?

I mean seriously, how do you measure success for severely disabled kids? IEP progress? Every bit of that is almost subjective, you would have to be with a child every day to tell the difference.


Most of my problem with unions is that they fire younger teachers because they were the last in when it comes to being forced to let people go.

My problem with non unionized programs is that they fire people who take the initiave to become better educated with a masters or PHD becuase they don't want to pay the higher salary.

Either way you're losing people who may be passionate about the profession and it's all over money.

Regarding 1 and 2: that's precisely what they're doing. But you are basically asking them to surrender their right to do so because they work with children.

Regarding 3: That's built into most contracts

Regarding 4: Clearly, given your concern with the quality of teachers, the best way to remedy this is to encourage all the good teachers to quit.

[/quote]
Teachers start out decently educated and probably highly motivated. Has your union improved either of those for you? Every good teacher I know thinks their union is an impediment.[/quote]

Teachers have professional associations. The professional associations probably do help you become better at your job. I suppose on balance I am better off for my membership in mine.

But my union, while not making me a better teacher, certainly plays a major role in assuring that I receive the salary and benefits necessary to keep me in this profession.

This thread is great.

Teachers - the only professionals I know that need unionization.