On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 20:24:19 -0500, "JimH" wrote:
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 18:49:27 -0500, "JimH" wrote:
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 17:19:58 -0500, "JimH" wrote:
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
om...
~~ snippage
~~ snippage ~~
Wrong question again. It is assumed that any teacher performing at any
grade level has the skills to teach.
And that is the problem. Perhaps it can be traced back to Unions....eh?
Actually, no. In this state, CEA argued and lobbied unsuccessfully
against the Praxis which was the brain child of a former Dept of Ed
Commissioner who was a real...um...innovator.
In fact, the Praxis test and the whole mentoring system has failed
miserably allowing poorly qualified teachers into the system.
Kind of curious that.
In CT, a skills test must be
passed to obtain a teaching position.
That test shows that basic skill levels have been obtained....nothing more.
Are you content with "basic level" teachers Tom? Not me,
I'm not at all sure what you mean by that. Everybody has to have a
basic level of understanding of anything before they can become
proficient at it. My first job as an engineer was checking drawings
and compiling/checking data points for Senior Engineers. It only
through the use of those basic skills that one gains experience and
technique.
I'm satisfied with basic skills under supervision which is pretty much
how it works now.
But to be straight forward, if you equate skill to years taught, then
yes - two year teachers should be paid the same - thirty year teachers
should be paid the same.
I never equated the skill level to number of years taught.
You did a good job skirting my original question, so I will ask it again:
1. Do you believe that all teachers in a school district, regardless of
skills deserve the same pay increase every year?
All teachers are not paid the same in any school district in CT. It's
based on years of service and education. And by definition a thirty
year teacher is, in theory, paid more than a two year teacher because
of experience, education and in-service skills.
Let me try it this way. If you mean that a two year teacher with a BS
degree should be paid the same as a two year teacher with a BS/MS,
then no - the two year teacher with the BS/MS should be paid more than
the teacher with the BS. That is a skills based criteria.
If you mean that a two year teacher with a BS/MS should be paid the
same as a thirty year teacher with a BS/MS, then no - the thirty year
teacher should be paid more because of seniority which translates to
experience and skills related to that experience.
Does that make more sense?
2. Do you believe that all teachers in a school district, regardless of
commitment, deserve the same pay increase every year?
How do you judge commitment?
It is self evident to the principal who runs the school. Talk to your
wife.
She will confirm this.
Heh - I just showed it to her and she still is laughing.
So? How does that address the question? Is she still laughing?
What if you have an administrator who is biased towards, oh say,
younger teachers? Or male teachers over female teachers? Or having
affairs with one or the other? Or believes that participation in
mandatory "after school events" such as group mountain climbing, bike
riding and other participatory sports are essential to the proper
running of a school?
How about an administrator who, in the throes of divorce, makes
improper advances towards staff members and threatens unsatisfactory
evaluations?
You mean those kind of administrators?
We are taling about the masses...the norm.
One persons opinion does not represent the masses.
Commitment to the job is evident during my job appraisals and always has
been.
Really? Gee - never has been in my career.
So? It has been in mine.
I did my job because I
got paid to do my job.
Then you had non commitment. My point made.
I got paid to be the best engineer I could be.
I was never, EVER, committed to any company for anything other than
doing my job. No extras unless I was paid for them. If I committed
extra hours to a project, it was pretty much because I was interested
in the problem - not because I was committed to anything.
I did work my years of eighty hour weeks and it damn near killed me.
But it sure as hell wasn't because I was committed to the damn company
- it was because I was being paid a lot of money to get things done.
Sounds like you have some personal issues to deal with.
Now see, that's not at all fair or even true.
Being totally dispassionate about any company is the best way to make
money - you see beyond the BS and can make decisions based on reality.
I always, without fail, went with the money. The four times I changed
companies, it was because (1) the money was better (2) the
responsibilities were greater (3) the perks were better.
Now is you mean commitment as in staying the length of the contract,
then yes - I never changed in the middle of the contract even if there
was mucho money involved. It was a matter of personal integrity.
It's different than commitment although they share similar meanings.
The only thing I am loyal (read committed) to is my family, country,
the Corps and myself. :)
Is it hours after school doing additional extra help?
I do not understand your question. If you mean does *x* amount of after
hours work equate to one being a good teacher, the answer is obviously
"no".
See my example below of a football coach.
Committing to a non-paying coaching or mentoring position?
How about Union commitment - doing all the dirty work in the
organizational trenches so that teachers aren't beat to hell by
administration's and Board of Educations?
Union commitment? Bzzzzzz. No credit. Self satisfying. Self
gratifying.
So attending a meeting in which a teacher is falsely accused of
mistreating a student and scripting the event is not important?
When did I say that?
You did - look above. Bzzzzzzz - no credit - self satisfying - self
gratifying? :)
Or
helping straighten out three consequitive payroll FUBARs isn't
important? Or filing harassment charges against an administrator who
made sexually suggestive remarks to a subordinate?
Again, when did I day that?
Look, you obviously have an opinion that is diametrically opposed to
mine. And that's fine. My opinions are based on my personal
experiences and observing the experiences of a lot of teacher's who
are my friends.
~~ rest snipped ~~
Have a nice evening Tom.
Back at 'cha.
Nice chatting with you.
Later,
Tom
|