Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As evidenced by the "Chic-fill-a" scenario yesterday, the people's voice can certainly be heard.
What, pray-tell, have the voices of fried chicken loving bigots accomplished and who, other than those in their choir heard them exactly? If that's the exemplar of your current efforts, may I suggest generating a plan B.
Location: The Flagship City and Vacation in the Paris of Appalachia
2,773 posts, read 3,855,823 times
Reputation: 2067
It seems that the majority of this issue seems to be pension related? I for one as a college professor am a strong proponent of academic tenure, which was originally developed as a means to protect free thinking professors from powerful donors and the board of trustees. Academic freedom is part of tenure, but I also believe religious freedom and protection from powerful outsiders are the more important aspects of tenure in all forms of education (higher, secondary, elementary). I have worked in both untenured and tenured positions within higher education and there is a major difference in the classroom. During my work as an untenured professor I was actually disciplined for "grading too hard," when in fact the average grades in my courses were around 76%, which is pretty "average." My supervisor told me on several occasions that academic rigor was less important than enrollment numbers. Needless to say, I decided to leave this job and go somewhere I could get tenure. During the years I was seeking tenure I had to relax my standards a little, but now that I have tenure I can finally ensure the students are performing at a high level without fear of reprimand for "grading too hard."
I believe the same applies to elementary and secondary education and abolishing tenure or tying raises to student performance on standardized tests are not the answer. Significantly lowering teacher pay is also not the answer. I believe a more rigorous tenure process for elementary and secondary teachers is a viable solution, along with ending the teacher pension and replacing it with a 403b or something similar. As a college professor at a private university, I do not get a pension, but I do have an excellent match for my 403b and I am able to effectively do my job with academic tenure. One way that Pine Richland and other schools could save money is to use a similar tenure model to higher education where it would take teachers 5-6 years to achieve tenure instead of the 2-3 years that it currently takes most PA teachers. This way it gives the administration and the district more time to make sure the teacher is competent and is in the best interest of the long term success of the district. Additionally, the pension system is similar to some large corporations and college pensions that have existed in the past, but many of these are being phased out and replaced with more cost effective options. This issue may be hard to address though since it is more of a statewide issue, but PR or any district could add more steps to the payscale as a means of deterring people from retiring young and taking the nontaxable (by the state at least) pension. In other words, if the payscale had 28 steps vs. the current 17 steps that are listed on page 66 of the union contract from this website: http://www.openpagov.org/k12_payroll.asp
As a brief summary, I am a proponent of tenure at all levels of education. However, I feel that only the best teachers should be tenured and the process should be more rigorous. I realize the pension issue is a big deal and my only solution is to increase the number of salary steps so that it takes teachers longer to get the higher pension. Maybe this would deter teachers retiring after only 20 years of work and being at the top of the payscale? The aforementioned step increase would also backload the pay for teachers and since they would be moving up at a slower rate significantly decrease the need to increase taxes for annual wage increases. In conclusion, increasing the rigor of tenure and adding more payscale steps are the only viable solutions I see for any PA district with rising taxes since eliminating the pension is not a local issue. The solution I just mentioned seems fair since the top of the payscale is pretty high in PR and 17 steps is a relatively short amount of time to reach the top.
It seems that the majority of this issue seems to be pension related? I for one as a college professor am a strong proponent of academic tenure, which was originally developed as a means to protect free thinking professors from powerful donors and the board of trustees. Academic freedom is part of tenure, but I also believe religious freedom and protection from powerful outsiders are the more important aspects of tenure in all forms of education (higher, secondary, elementary). I have worked in both untenured and tenured positions within higher education and there is a major difference in the classroom. During my work as an untenured professor I was actually disciplined for "grading too hard," when in fact the average grades in my courses were around 76%, which is pretty "average." My supervisor told me on several occasions that academic rigor was less important than enrollment numbers. Needless to say, I decided to leave this job and go somewhere I could get tenure. During the years I was seeking tenure I had to relax my standards a little, but now that I have tenure I can finally ensure the students are performing at a high level without fear of reprimand for "grading too hard."
I believe the same applies to elementary and secondary education and abolishing tenure or tying raises to student performance on standardized tests are not the answer. Significantly lowering teacher pay is also not the answer. I believe a more rigorous tenure process for elementary and secondary teachers is a viable solution, along with ending the teacher pension and replacing it with a 403b or something similar. As a college professor at a private university, I do not get a pension, but I do have an excellent match for my 403b and I am able to effectively do my job with academic tenure. One way that Pine Richland and other schools could save money is to use a similar tenure model to higher education where it would take teachers 5-6 years to achieve tenure instead of the 2-3 years that it currently takes most PA teachers. This way it gives the administration and the district more time to make sure the teacher is competent and is in the best interest of the long term success of the district. Additionally, the pension system is similar to some large corporations and college pensions that have existed in the past, but many of these are being phased out and replaced with more cost effective options. This issue may be hard to address though since it is more of a statewide issue, but PR or any district could add more steps to the payscale as a means of deterring people from retiring young and taking the nontaxable (by the state at least) pension. In other words, if the payscale had 28 steps vs. the current 17 steps that are listed on page 66 of the union contract from this website: http://www.openpagov.org/k12_payroll.asp
As a brief summary, I am a proponent of tenure at all levels of education. However, I feel that only the best teachers should be tenured and the process should be more rigorous. I realize the pension issue is a big deal and my only solution is to increase the number of salary steps so that it takes teachers longer to get the higher pension. Maybe this would deter teachers retiring after only 20 years of work and being at the top of the payscale? The aforementioned step increase would also backload the pay for teachers and since they would be moving up at a slower rate significantly decrease the need to increase taxes for annual wage increases. In conclusion, increasing the rigor of tenure and adding more payscale steps are the only viable solutions I see for any PA district with rising taxes since eliminating the pension is not a local issue. The solution I just mentioned seems fair since the top of the payscale is pretty high in PR and 17 steps is a relatively short amount of time to reach the top.
I hate logical, intelligent, and well thought out posts.
What, pray-tell, have the voices of fried chicken loving bigots accomplished and who, other than those in their choir heard them exactly? If that's the exemplar of your current efforts, may I suggest generating a plan B.
Since you brought up this position and not me, before you call anyone a bigot, I would suggest you read the first Amendmnet of our wonderful constitution. Then pull out your Bible (providing you have one) and read Leviticus 18:22-23 and 20-13 and Corinthians 1 6:9-10.
Mr. Cathy has every right, as do all Americans, to express their religious beliefs without fear of reprisal or intimidation.
No one directed anger at you yet your choice of wording shows a high level of such on your part. As a result, you can rest assured any suggestions you make toward the efforts of our group will most certainly fall upon deaf ears.
I hate logical, intelligent, and well thought out posts.
Sorry to hear this. This thread is centered around a very logical, intelligent and well thought out effort. You might possible want to consider revolving your time around other issues that do not require these attributes.
It seems that the majority of this issue seems to be pension related? I for one as a college professor am a strong proponent of academic tenure, which was originally developed as a means to protect free thinking professors from powerful donors and the board of trustees. Academic freedom is part of tenure, but I also believe religious freedom and protection from powerful outsiders are the more important aspects of tenure in all forms of education (higher, secondary, elementary). I have worked in both untenured and tenured positions within higher education and there is a major difference in the classroom. During my work as an untenured professor I was actually disciplined for "grading too hard," when in fact the average grades in my courses were around 76%, which is pretty "average." My supervisor told me on several occasions that academic rigor was less important than enrollment numbers. Needless to say, I decided to leave this job and go somewhere I could get tenure. During the years I was seeking tenure I had to relax my standards a little, but now that I have tenure I can finally ensure the students are performing at a high level without fear of reprimand for "grading too hard."
I believe the same applies to elementary and secondary education and abolishing tenure or tying raises to student performance on standardized tests are not the answer. Significantly lowering teacher pay is also not the answer. I believe a more rigorous tenure process for elementary and secondary teachers is a viable solution, along with ending the teacher pension and replacing it with a 403b or something similar. As a college professor at a private university, I do not get a pension, but I do have an excellent match for my 403b and I am able to effectively do my job with academic tenure. One way that Pine Richland and other schools could save money is to use a similar tenure model to higher education where it would take teachers 5-6 years to achieve tenure instead of the 2-3 years that it currently takes most PA teachers. This way it gives the administration and the district more time to make sure the teacher is competent and is in the best interest of the long term success of the district. Additionally, the pension system is similar to some large corporations and college pensions that have existed in the past, but many of these are being phased out and replaced with more cost effective options. This issue may be hard to address though since it is more of a statewide issue, but PR or any district could add more steps to the payscale as a means of deterring people from retiring young and taking the nontaxable (by the state at least) pension. In other words, if the payscale had 28 steps vs. the current 17 steps that are listed on page 66 of the union contract from this website: http://www.openpagov.org/k12_payroll.asp
As a brief summary, I am a proponent of tenure at all levels of education. However, I feel that only the best teachers should be tenured and the process should be more rigorous. I realize the pension issue is a big deal and my only solution is to increase the number of salary steps so that it takes teachers longer to get the higher pension. Maybe this would deter teachers retiring after only 20 years of work and being at the top of the payscale? The aforementioned step increase would also backload the pay for teachers and since they would be moving up at a slower rate significantly decrease the need to increase taxes for annual wage increases. In conclusion, increasing the rigor of tenure and adding more payscale steps are the only viable solutions I see for any PA district with rising taxes since eliminating the pension is not a local issue. The solution I just mentioned seems fair since the top of the payscale is pretty high in PR and 17 steps is a relatively short amount of time to reach the top.
Dear Professor,
Thank you for your input and reveal of your experience as an educator in regard to the tenure system.
As a taxpayer in an affluent school district with a recent school board vote that will increase my taxes by 4%, I must say that I do not have the same respect for this tenure system.
No where in the private job sector can one be assured of this type of job security. Why then should it be so in the public job sector when educators daily affect our most precious commodity, our children and their future? As in every working environment there are those who make every effort to excel in their positions. These are the workers who will most likely maintain their positions. There are also those who make very little and/or no effort at all to excel and most likely do not maintain their positions and especially so when they are not protected by a union.
The tenure system quarantees job security to those who make little and/or no effort to excel. These ineffective workers however, due to their tenure, continue to receive the union negotiated pay raises and excellent medical coverage to which they contribute only 5%, while we the taxpayers pay for not only our own health coverage, but theirs as well. This is a hard pill to swallow for all taxpayers, but when we are forced to pay for our employees who may not be deserving of these benefits and salary increases, it then becomes a very bitter pill.
Job performance should be the only measure to determine teacher salary increases and whether or not they maintain their positions and not an antiquated system such as tenure.
Sorry to hear this. This thread is centered around a very logical, intelligent and well thought out effort. You might possible want to consider revolving your time around other issues that do not require these attributes.
Your humor alluded me and quite frankly, in my opinion, was misplaced. You have every right to post whatever you wish. I only hope that if you choose to continue posting on this issue, you will be inclined to go the productive route. There are no self serving interests here. Our efforts could have a trickle down effect and be of benefit to a wider audience than just Pine Richland residents.
To use an over used cliche....just keepin' it real !!
Location: The Flagship City and Vacation in the Paris of Appalachia
2,773 posts, read 3,855,823 times
Reputation: 2067
Southeastlady
I have to respectfully disagree with you in regards to tenure and in the private sector there is no need for tenure because there are "Golden Parachutes," contract buyouts, and usually better pay. Additionally, those in the private sector are usually hidden from the public eye, unless they are at a very high level in a publicly traded company, i.e. CEO. For instance, the teacher's have their salaries published publicly and their contracts are available online for all of us to peruse. I think you may be shocked if you saw some of the private sector contracts that offer country club memberships, use of company jets, personal vehicles, and pay increases that resemble the pay of professional athletes.
Secondly, it appears that you are tying tenure to pay raises, healthcare, and other aspects of a teacher's job that have nothing to do with tenure. The idea of tenure comes from the European education model and was highly touted by Max Weber and many other early sociologists. Weber believed that tenure would help organizations free themselves of "politics" and ensure productivity. Teachers should be able to teach without the interjection of politics and without the fear of undue influence by powerful parents or alumni. For instance, how would you feel if your son/daughter simply "received" high grades from teachers because they were worried about their next merit increase? There have been cheating scandals nationwide where teachers have been involved in changing student answers on standardized tests or simply "teaching to the test" so that they can get that raise or stay employed. Applying some business principles to education makes sense, but turning education into a business will result in the death of critical thinking and our children will no longer be able to compete with students from other countries.
I am already noticing some of the "brain drain" that is occurring in PA education and some of the best domestic students I have had in recent years come from public Magnet schools, which take the best students from a given area (a larger boundary than the traditional school district) and put them in specially designed courses for high achieving students. These Magnet schools are great because they provide excellent opportunities for the best public school students, but they also pick and choose their students through an admissions process and potentially contribute to the "brain drain" of the other public schools. These Magnet schools may have seemed like a great idea at first, but due to the funding blueprint outlined by NCLB, this is a disaster for many districts with multiple schools since the Magnet performs at a high level while the other schools decline and lose funding. My point is simple, cost saving strategies need to be implemented in education, but it is not a business and should not be implemented in the same way as a business.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
