Teachers union reason for state of education

[SuperSparkle928]

Originally Posted by Lincolnian

Convenient viewpoint. It's nice to think that complex problems are so simple.

That poster is just stating the obvious. Odds of me ever had worked for any union shop = 0%.
But then again, I would never would have become a teacher, as I could (and did) earn 10 times that in high-tech. (though I loved teaching my engineers the technology). Often (though not always), pay is related to what is considered 'value added'. Fortunately, I never had to work with anyone in a union. No flames please, and back to the regularly scheduled thread.

[Ivorytickler]

Originally Posted by wyolady

Perhaps your students have too much power because you give it to them. A few ruin a class only if you let them. What you focus on grows....focus on your great students. I bet they will be delighted and perhaps have been waiting for it.

I don't give it to them. Administrators who roll every time a parent complains do.

And then there's the really scary stuff. It would take only one student lying about me to finish my career and they know it. I know two teachers who had students lie about sexual advances. In both cases the student's recanted but it doesn't matter. Neither one of them will ever be able to get a job as a teacher again.

[jps-teacher]

Originally Posted by SCGranny

Honestly, I think that education began to fail when the DOE was established.

When you have millions of dollars going into a bureaucracy and administration that has little to no "boots-on-the-ground" experience, that believes in a hierarchy rather than an applicable philosophy, and that believes in a "one-size-fits-all" education, you end up with classrooms that become battlegrounds, schools that become teen social organizations, and a general philosophy that turns schools into dumping grounds for parents to throw their children so that they they don't have to deal with them. The DOE arbitrarily sets standards across the board, and 'teaches' teachers that their purpose is to socialize, not teach - then insists that the teachers are failures because they cannot both socialize the children and teach them the basics. It's why some teachers "get caught" teaching students only to barely pass standardized tests rather than teaching them to learn.

Background & Analysis

The Feds contribute about 10% of the direct education budget - with a huge chunk of that going to the Special Education mandate, though less than there should be.

The Education Department was created at a federal level in 1980. The "one-size-fits-all" education is not primarily a function of Washington - and even when the federal government got involved in national standards, to a limited degree, it was NCLB in 2001, nothing before that. Homogeneous curriculum is not a modern product, either - statewide standards have existed for more decades than federal standards.

Originally Posted by SCGranny

(If the Teachers' Unions) demanded that their members be accorded parental and student respect, there would be a massive state- and nationwide movement to eradicate the unions, because they dared to insist that students and parents bear equal responsibility in education.

Demand?

There is no enforcement possible, making it wasted breath for the unions to demand.