School not getting results? Fire everybody!

[downtown]

Yeah, they aren't. But when I first heard, I think you mentioned it actually, that they were coming to RI, I thought "why? We don't have any... oh yeah, Central Falls."



The comments on that article and this one are incredibly harsh.

Ha, some of those comments are pretty funny. Still, I'm glad I'm not teaching in RI. There is going to be a pretty big backlash against those TFA kids. The NYT article says that Central Falls is now looking at booking TFA after all...something that I honestly have a bit of a problem with. TFA is a perfectly fine band-aid, and it is better than nothing, but it isn't a staffing solution. There isn't a school in the country that is successful with a majority of 1st and 2nd years (many charters with TFA-vets are actually very good though).

 

[LucyDuke]

It's kind of stupid that they fired everybody, then this...

Some of the fired teachers — up to half — could be rehired, as allowed in the federal turnaround model.

http://www.projo.com/news/content/central_falls_gallo_02-25-10_7JHIJHB_v81.3a63368.html


This whole thing gives some ammo to the push to unify all the state's school districts. Central Falls is geographically tiny and there's no reason it couldn't share schools with Lincoln or Pawtucket. Even just regional mergers would improve the situation.

 

[luiz]

Why don't you tell everyone about your extensive experience with "high-need American students"?

Where did I say I had any?

I said:
a) Underprivileged american students are still quite privileged, on the grand scheme of things;
b) Good results have been achieved with far poorer students, in far worse regions, with far less resources and far less compensation for the teachers.

I can prove both statements; but anyone who questions them is either terribly ignorant or terribly stupid, because they're both common knowledge. Note that I am not saying that it is possible to replicate exactly the same models anywhere; each place has its own reality. But it should be quite obvious that teaching poor american students is very far from an impossible task. Got it?

 

[downtown]

Where did I say I had any?

I said:
a) Underprivileged american students are still quite privileged, on the grand scheme of things;
b) Good results have been achieved with far poorer students, in far worse regions, with far less resources and far less compensation for the teachers.

I can prove both statements; but anyone who questions them is either terribly ignorant or terribly stupid, because they're both common knowledge. Note that I am not saying that it is possible to replicate exactly the same models anywhere; each place has its own reality. But it should be quite obvious that teaching poor american students is very far from an impossible task. Got it?

I never said it was impossible either...its what I do for a living after all. I do not believe you are going to have a long-term staffing solution when you only want to pay around 40K (which is what I make as a first year in a crap situation), because your retention will be so low. Even at high wages, urban retention is terrible, far worse than other developed countries.

I think comparing salary requirements to other countries is really apples and oranges. Other schools are cheaper because they often have sophisticated welfare states that take care of what we expect American schools to do. What is more useful is comparing methodology, not dollars.

I also think its quite ridiculous for another Brazilian to lecture an American about achievement gaps, considering you guys have prob the worst out of any country that could reasonably be considered developed, besides maybe India.

 

[capslock]

Aren't teachers salary workers? How do salary workers get overtime? Do they get paid while grading homework and tests at night and on the weekend?

I think its a good move by the superintendent.

 

[amadeus]

Thus ever proving my contention that teachers don't really give a crap about their students and that the public school system is a failure.

"When school children start paying union dues, that's when I'll start representing the interests of school children."

-Albert Shanker

President, United Federation of Teachers 1964-1984
President, American Federation of Teachers 1974-1997

 

[Mise]

Aren't teachers salary workers? How do salary workers get overtime?

Erm, salary workers can get paid overtime too. Happens all the time... Don't know where you got the idea that they couldn't, or didn't, but whoever told you that is completely wrong.

 

[luiz]

I never said it was impossible either...its what I do for a living after all. I do not believe you are going to have a long-term staffing solution when you only want to pay around 40K (which is what I make as a first year in a crap situation), because your retention will be so low. Even at high wages, urban retention is terrible, far worse than other developed countries.

I think comparing salary requirements to other countries is really apples and oranges. Other schools are cheaper because they often have sophisticated welfare states that take care of what we expect American schools to do. What is more useful is comparing methodology, not dollars.

I also think its quite ridiculous for another Brazilian to lecture an American about achievement gaps, considering you guys have prob the worst out of any country that could reasonably be considered developed, besides maybe India.

I was not lecturing... I pointed out in fact that most of our schools manage to be worse than their american counterparts. What I did say is that some specific schools, that deal with far poorer students in far more violent areas than you have ever seen in your life, still manage to get excellent results, basically focusing on discipline and traditional teaching. The military schools being a prime example.

 

[RedRalph]

That, of course, is one of the better ironies in modern political debate: "Let the market decide" is for how much the bosses and manipulators earn. And "they're overpaid and should be forced to settle for less than what they can get in the market" is for anyone in the public sector or a union.

Yup, that about sums it up. They have no consistent positions on anything anymore.

 

[luiz]

Yup, that about sums it up. They have no consistent positions on anything anymore.

78k is not the market salary for those teachers. If they feel they are underpaid, why don't they actually try to get a better paying job in the private sector? Clearly they're not doing their job out of idealism, since their position is "screw the kids, I want more money".

If anything I see a double standard in the position of you lefties. You guys are defending imoral, selfish and overpaid professionals just because they're unionised, and hence "the good guys" in your world view.

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

Sometimes I wonder if firing the teachers in the middle of the year would confuse students and make them mess up even more?

 

[RedRalph]

78k is not the market salary for those teachers. If they feel they are underpaid, why don't they actually try to get a better paying job in the private sector? Clearly they're not doing their job out of idealism, since their position is "screw the kids, I want more money".

If anything I see a double standard in the position of you lefties. You guys are defending imoral, selfish and overpaid professionals just because they're unionised, and hence "the good guys" in your world view.

Oh I do think they are overpaid. But if people are willing to pay them that much, then isn't that by definition far, as dictated by free-market principles?

 

[Cutlass]

78k is not the market salary for those teachers. If they feel they are underpaid, why don't they actually try to get a better paying job in the private sector? Clearly they're not doing their job out of idealism, since their position is "screw the kids, I want more money".

If anything I see a double standard in the position of you lefties. You guys are defending imoral, selfish and overpaid professionals just because they're unionised, and hence "the good guys" in your world view.

And you are claiming that they are immoral and selfish for no reason other than that they are in a union.

 

[warpus]

Oh I do think they are overpaid. But if people are willing to pay them that much, then isn't that by definition far, as dictated by free-market principles?

They are paying them that much due to unions, not cause they want to.

 

[Mise]

They are paying them that much due to unions, not cause they want to.

You mean they negotiated with the unions, and both sides agreed that 78k was an acceptable salary?

 

[luiz]

Oh I do think they are overpaid. But if people are willing to pay them that much, then isn't that by definition far, as dictated by free-market principles?

There's no free market about the salary of public school teachers. If a private school was paying them that, sure.

 

[luiz]

And you are claiming that they are immoral and selfish for no reason other than that they are in a union.

No. I am saying that they are imoral and selfish because they refuse to do a little extra effort for a fair compensation, when such effort is obviously much needed. Quite frankly they should work the required extra time (which is very little) for free, given their already handsome salary. When my company is having trouble I work more hours for free, and I don't make nearly as much as those lovely types (and I'm an engineer!).

But I am a right-winger and an engineer, therefore I am an evil reactionary and a "class enemy", while those unionized teachers making nearly twice as much as me are working class heroes.

 

[downtown]

There's no free market about the salary of public school teachers. If a private school was paying them that, sure.

Of course there is. Half of the country operates without unions, and in most cities, the unions aren't so strong anymore. Clinton, Bush 2 and Obama's departments of Ed have focused on reducing union power.

There is a free market even with unions after all. Central Falls is one of the first schools to do this, but it has been an option for everybody for at least a decade.

There is no govt mandate to pay that salary. The govt has made it easier to fire them.

 

[RedRalph]

There's no free market about the salary of public school teachers. If a private school was paying them that, sure.

What are you talking about? If that's the salary they want, then if it's too high the free market would see that someone cheaper replaced them. And then you, as the high-priest of free marketeering, advocate voluntary unpaid work!!! Laughable.

honestly Luiz, you are way out of your depth here.

 

[luiz]

Of course there is. Half of the country operates without unions, and in most cities, the unions aren't so strong anymore. Clinton, Bush 2 and Obama's departments of Ed have focused on reducing union power.

There is a free market even with unions after all. Central Falls is one of the first schools to do this, but it has been an option for everybody for at least a decade.

There is no govt mandate to pay that salary. The govt has made it easier to fire them.

Well of course market mechanisms may play a role. They played even in Soviet Union. But to say that the salary of unionised public employees is somehow the result of the free market in action is quite bizarre. There's nothing free there.