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.
How do these female teachers look like? Do these male students really consider themselves to be "abused" or are they giving themselves high-fives?
Sports is definitely important in human development, but maybe sports the way it is implemented in many public schools needs to be rethought? Especially in this age of elite private academies that have made even college scholarships a lot more competitive, one needs to study whether the financial burden of full-blown athletic programs needs to be passed on to school districts.
That is a great point, I was just referring to the comment about sports not helping kids be better in life. I think sports does play a huge role in one's school experience, even for those that do not play. Whether it's being in the band that plays at football games, cheerleading or just having school spirit I think sports are important in school. But like you said, the financial burden these days does need to be taken into account.
This part I have to disagree vehemently about. Here are a few reasons I can think of as to why kids playing sports does make them do better in life:
Builds character
Promotes teamwork
Teaches accountability
Teaches good sportsmanship
Teaches behavior expectations
Teaches how practicing makes you better at something
Teaches how to handle stressful situations
Teaches commitment
Helps build self esteem and confidence
Promotes exercise
Teaches how to interact with others both on your level and those in a position of authority
Not to mention someone with exceptional athletic ability can get scholarships and/or get into a better college, and for the cream if the crop can lead to a very nice living.
I actually don't disagree(shock). It just has to be in conjunction with decent academics, which unfortunately aren't really happening here lately.
Within a decade, elite sports camps will most likely be the primary feeder of recruits to the college and pro leagues. That puts to question the need to have full blown athletics complete with FT coaches and traveling teams.
Among the private schools in the NYC metro, there is a growing emphasis on physical activities that kids can realistically pursue all the way to adulthood like martial arts, dance, yoga, table tennis. In my kids school, team sports (basketball, soccer and v-ball) have 3x/week no pressure practice only and focus is on developing individual skills like shooting, pick & roll, etc. rather than hoping of one day beating Christ the King.
I still cant figure out what a stupid intendent does to earn over 300k a year which is totally absurd.
Then they will retire with another couple hundred grand a year for the rest of their lives.
I've tried to explain this a number of times and I'm not defending it. They get $300k because we pay teachers upwards of $100k and principals upwards of $150k (both of these #'s are conservative, my kid's teacher makes $124k for 10 mos. w Cadillac benefits). You can pluck teachers from the trees. A Superintendent is high profile, many hours above full time, deals with the board, parents, lawyers, Newsday, auditors, teacher's union, town, county, etc. Few principals working 8 hr days making $175k want that job. It's tough to fill. Have to get through a tribunal of residents, union, board, consultants just to get hired. Also, NYSED has such strict requirements to keep those already in the game as the only ones eligible so the districts keep hiring double dipping retirees at outrageous contracts (+/- $1000 per day, yes I said PER DAY)! Tell me 1/2 the MBA's out there couldn't be a business official?! Nope, need a specialized NYSED grad program to get the SDBL certification. Super pays proportionate to all the other inflated school salaries. Whereas teacher and administrator are fairly cushy gigs, Superintendent is a rather sucky one. So it pays a lot more. The whole compensation system is completely out of whack...but I'm preaching to the choir about that.
Wow their even more overpaid than i originally thought. They have some nerve loooking for raises constantly like their just everyday broke working stiffs. They should all be drug tested, theirs quite a few teachers that have never kicked there drug habits from back when they were students in sachem. Nice to know theres some teaching our kids that like to get high and are nothing but well paid junkies with connections for cushy work.
I've tried to explain this a number of times and I'm not defending it. They get $300k because we pay teachers upwards of $100k and principals upwards of $150k (both of these #'s are conservative, my kid's teacher makes $124k for 10 mos. w Cadillac benefits). You can pluck teachers from the trees. A Superintendent is high profile, many hours above full time, deals with the board, parents, lawyers, Newsday, auditors, teacher's union, town, county, etc. Few principals working 8 hr days making $175k want that job. It's tough to fill. Have to get through a tribunal of residents, union, board, consultants just to get hired. Also, NYSED has such strict requirements to keep those already in the game as the only ones eligible so the districts keep hiring double dipping retirees at outrageous contracts (+/- $1000 per day, yes I said PER DAY)! Tell me 1/2 the MBA's out there couldn't be a business official?! Nope, need a specialized NYSED grad program to get the SDBL certification. Super pays proportionate to all the other inflated school salaries. Whereas teacher and administrator are fairly cushy gigs, Superintendent is a rather sucky one. So it pays a lot more. The whole compensation system is completely out of whack...but I'm preaching to the choir about that.
If I am reading this correctly it seems we have a rather poor bunch of superintendents on Long Island because the successful administrators at the HS level don't want to fill the position. And it is generally understood the most successful teachers don't move to the administrative ranks. Actually, this dovetails with what I have observed over the last 30 years so I think you may be on to something.
Too bad the higher pay at the administrative level does not attract the successful teachers and the much higher pay at the superintendent level does not attract the most successful HS administrators.
Not to be picky but my daughters' principal works 10+ hour days, plus attends numerous meetings (including board meetings) plus attends every Saturday event under the sun. He has a higher profile than the district superintendent. I don't see his hours increasing as a superintendent but I don't see him cracking the incestuous superintendent coterie either.
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.
