On Tue, 08 Sep 2009 12:30:04 -0600, SteveB wrote:

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 08 Sep 2009 11:16:40 -0600, SteveB wrote:


Personally, I think they should have let the kids have a day off, and
have a closed door session with the teachers. And have one in a month
and cut about 20% of the dead wood.

But that's just me.

I know a teacher who's near 30 years service who is retiring because
he has to follow a syllabus on what to teach, which includes things
that have nothing to do with the subject he is teaching. A loss. I
have a son who just graduated college looking for a job, and who I
think would make a good teacher. Lots of people who would make good
teachers out there, and a lot of tenured POS's who need to be led away
from the trough. If they cut the dead weight, believe me, there would
be no shortage of applicants.

Steve

LOL, I haven't heard such a great argument *for* tenure in years.
Tenure allows teachers to teach, without having to deal with BS like
yours.

I'm sorry, but we are talking about two different things. I am talking
about teachers. You are talking about slugs who feed at the public
trough.

My, my, my. The concept of having my children taught by a teacher who
doesn't have to deal with the BS of parents. Hmmmmmmmm. Wait, wait, I
know the answer to this.

Ah, yes, teaching by committee. Outstanding. GB Halsted is just one
reason tenure for teachers was spread.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G._B._Halsted