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.
Continually get rid of the bottom-of-the-barrel 5% of teachers, teachers who obviously should not hold that position.
Send student-troublemakers to an alternative school/daytime-babysitting....so the kids who really want to be there and learn, can do so.
GE does that. Many professional organizations do that: accounting firms, lawyer and doctor practices, investment banks. It's up or out. It's easier to do in those settings because they attract the top of the talent pool and differences in ability are easier to identify. By the time you get to mid-strata it's more difficult.
But performance can still be measured. And good and bad teachers can be identified even by their pupils. We've all had both and never was it difficult to tell them apart.
Letting kids move around for school is a bad idea.
For universities, it's okay, because we don't have local universities everywhere (or even most places), nor should we. Plus, by that point, it's okay for the kid to be away on her own. Not everyone goes to university, either.
At the high school level, kids live with their families, and we need to education everyone. Putting disproportionate resources into some schools would just widen the gap between the haves and the have-nots. Eventually, a few elite schools would get everyone (surprise, surprise, but they'd be the kids of the people who are already elite), and everyone else would be locked out of the system forever. It's already sort of like this, with rich kids going off to expensive boarding schools.
As things are, kids can still go to the local public school and maintain a reasonable chance of getting into a top university. At least, their chances aren't so much worse than the chances of kids going to stronger high schools. Further stratefying the system would destroy that.
Urban schools aren't far apart. In the 60's they used to bus kids between schools to achieve racial integration. Access to a good school is as noble a goal as racial integration.
There are a lot of parochial schools in urban areas that are not elitist and are truly dedicated to the moral and personal development of their students. They are completely not-discriminatory, welcoming kids of every race and social strata. They could welcome many more. Suburban school districts surround urban ones and in many cases are as close as the nearest urban school. An artificial boundary created for God knows what reason should not be a wall between good schools and bad ones.
There are so many ways to tackle elitism issues. Tax exempt status is the obvious one. If you don't admit kids from certain tax brackets or zip codes, etc., you lose your tax exempt status. And donors would lose the tax deductibility of their donations.
Right now, rich kids in NY pay $30,000 a year (last I looked) to send their kids to elite PRE-schools. That's in the midst of the largest public school system in the world.
I have no problem with elitism as long as it's earned and isn't mere snobbery. I'm not elite and it doesn't bother me. Fear of elitism is a poor reason to resist approaches that could open access to it for more kids.
Urban schools aren't far apart. In the 60's they used to bus kids between schools to achieve racial integration. Access to a good school is as noble a goal as racial integration.
There are a lot of parochial schools in urban areas that are not elitist and are truly dedicated to the moral and personal development of their students. They are completely not-discriminatory, welcoming kids of every race and social strata. They could welcome many more. Suburban school districts surround urban ones and in many cases are as close as the nearest urban school. An artificial boundary created for God knows what reason should not be a wall between good schools and bad ones.
There are so many ways to tackle elitism issues. Tax exempt status is the obvious one. If you don't admit kids from certain tax brackets or zip codes, etc., you lose your tax exempt status. And donors would lose the tax deductibility of their donations.
Right now, rich kids in NY pay $30,000 a year (last I looked) to send their kids to elite PRE-schools. That's in the midst of the largest public school system in the world.
I have no problem with elitism as long as it's earned and isn't mere snobbery. I'm not elite and it doesn't bother me. Fear of elitism is a poor reason to resist approaches that could open access to it for more kids.
Forced integration is a bad idea. Everyone who endured Boston's busing in the 70s wants their own kids to walk down the street and go to school. Now areas with forced "choice" have little community interaction because on a street with 10 kids, those 10 kids are going to 10 different schools. So neighborhoods actually get destroyed like that.
There will always be people willing to spend huge money to separate their kids from everyone. Let them. I deal with kids who go to elite schools all the time. They're decent kids but have while getting their elite education have absolutely no common sense dealing with people who are not like them. One of the frustrating things about "reformers" is they have no idea how other people live, yet want to tell people that have worked and/or lived among the poor how they should feel and act.
GE does that. Many professional organizations do that: accounting firms, lawyer and doctor practices, investment banks. It's up or out. It's easier to do in those settings because they attract the top of the talent pool and differences in ability are easier to identify. By the time you get to mid-strata it's more difficult.
But performance can still be measured. And good and bad teachers can be identified even by their pupils. We've all had both and never was it difficult to tell them apart.
It happens in teaching -- a good principal normally keeps a teacher from even reaching tenure by not renewing their contract. And GE? Please. That's not a company known for treating their employees like human beings.
It happens in teaching -- a good principal normally keeps a teacher from even reaching tenure by not renewing their contract. And GE? Please. That's not a company known for treating their employees like human beings.
That's true. At one time, though, GE was known as the best engineering organization in the world. Before it got involved in financial wheeling and dealing. A lot of the people who didn't make were still very good. The ones who stuck around weren't as I recall a bunch of complainers.
In NY I don't believe tenure works the way it should. The trial period isn't long enough and I believe it was recently shortened even more. And I never understood why tenure was use in primary and secondary schools anyway. In colleges its purpose is to protect professors who teach controversial subjects where the expression of certain opinions might land one in trouble. Below college education is supposed to deal with non-controversial matter: the proverbial 3R's, music, a bit of social studies.
Regardless, also in NY, more teachers die while employed than are fired. That is certainly an indication that dead wood is not being pruned rigorously enough.
That's true. At one time, though, GE was known as the best engineering organization in the world. Before it got involved in financial wheeling and dealing. A lot of the people who didn't make were still very good. The ones who stuck around weren't as I recall a bunch of complainers.
In NY I don't believe tenure works the way it should. The trial period isn't long enough and I believe it was recently shortened even more. And I never understood why tenure was use in primary and secondary schools anyway. In colleges its purpose is to protect professors who teach controversial subjects where the expression of certain opinions might land one in trouble. Below college education is supposed to deal with non-controversial matter: the proverbial 3R's, music, a bit of social studies.
Regardless, also in NY, more teachers die while employed than are fired. That is certainly an indication that dead wood is not being pruned rigorously enough.
How long is it? In CT, it's four years (two if you transferred from a tenured position in a different system). At the same time, administration abuses it now by simply getting rid of all teachers before they hit tenure as a way to save money. They could be amazing teachers and they'll still get rid of them.
GE does that. Many professional organizations do that: accounting firms, lawyer and doctor practices, investment banks. It's up or out. It's easier to do in those settings because they attract the top of the talent pool and differences in ability are easier to identify. By the time you get to mid-strata it's more difficult.
But performance can still be measured. And good and bad teachers can be identified even by their pupils. We've all had both and never was it difficult to tell them apart.
FYI, the latest I've seen says GE has gotten away from the forced ranking. As have several of the big consulting firms. It's a process that sounds good, but isn't statistically supportable.
That's true. At one time, though, GE was known as the best engineering organization in the world. Before it got involved in financial wheeling and dealing. A lot of the people who didn't make were still very good. The ones who stuck around weren't as I recall a bunch of complainers.
In NY I don't believe tenure works the way it should. The trial period isn't long enough and I believe it was recently shortened even more. And I never understood why tenure was use in primary and secondary schools anyway. In colleges its purpose is to protect professors who teach controversial subjects where the expression of certain opinions might land one in trouble. Below college education is supposed to deal with non-controversial matter: the proverbial 3R's, music, a bit of social studies.
Regardless, also in NY, more teachers die while employed than are fired. That is certainly an indication that dead wood is not being pruned rigorously enough.
Tenure was put in place to protect teachers who did not adhere to the party line in the state or city. Teachers before tenure were often pushed to campaign for candidates they did not like. Also, teachers who hold unpopular views could be fired or sanctioned. You may be too young to remember the morals clauses - women who were unmarried were often fired if they lived with their boyfriends. GBLT teachers had to be deep in the closet. I know teachers who were politically very left wing who parents hated. The same is true for teachers who are very right wing. If the principal had differing views they tried to fire the teacher.
Tenure at the high school level protects teachers who teach controversial books that the parents dislike. For example, parents object to teaching Huckleberry Finn or Farenheit 451 and want the teacher fired despite the fact that the school approved the books.
It is NOT hard to fire a teacher with tenure for misconduct though - the misconduct has to be documented and the teacher has to have some remediation. This is similar for some other jobs, btw. I worked for IBM and there was a procedure to be followed to fire people.
Tenure is no more than a legal commitment (set by the state and negotiated union contracts) to procedural due process, ensuring notice and providing a hearing for generally accepted reasons for termination, such as incompetence, insubordination, and immorality. Tenure is not a lifetime guarantee.
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.
