• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Rahm Emanuel Also Has A Union Problem

Back when No Child Left Behind was passed, our nation decided that all school children are identical and any performance difference had to be the fault of the teacher.

We do in fact know many factors that affect student performance. For example when a child changes schools, it's equivalent to a loss of several months of schooling. Children from dysfunctional families tend to have problems in school. Children whose parents don't read regress over summer vacation.

But since it's politically convenient to assume all children are exactly the same, we no longer discuss these issues. It's far easier to dump on the teachers taking on the toughest cases.
 
Back when No Child Left Behind was passed, our nation decided that all school children are identical and any performance difference had to be the fault of the teacher.

We do in fact know many factors that affect student performance. For example when a child changes schools, it's equivalent to a loss of several months of schooling. Children from dysfunctional families tend to have problems in school. Children whose parents don't read regress over summer vacation.

But since it's politically convenient to assume all children are exactly the same, we no longer discuss these issues. It's far easier to dump on the teachers taking on the toughest cases.

This is why the evaluation should be done as locally as possible, within the schools and by the parents, and only way to encourage this internal evaluation is parental empowerment through school choice.
 
Last edited:
Back when No Child Left Behind was passed, our nation decided that all school children are identical and any performance difference had to be the fault of the teacher.

We do in fact know many factors that affect student performance. For example when a child changes schools, it's equivalent to a loss of several months of schooling. Children from dysfunctional families tend to have problems in school. Children whose parents don't read regress over summer vacation.

But since it's politically convenient to assume all children are exactly the same, we no longer discuss these issues. It's far easier to dump on the teachers taking on the toughest cases.
NCLB was passed because we had high school graduates who couldn't spell their own names, yet received good grades.

Thus, the need for testing standards so we can compare/contrast different schools and districts.

What Emanuel wants to do is rate teachers by performance, to see how students improve in their classrooms. The CTU just wants more money and no accountability whatsoever. They want to be paid as professionals, but don't want to be judged by performance like any other professional group. This has to end.
 
Bad teachers usually hang on until retirement, because principals don't want to go through this byzantine procedure.

Bad principals don't want to bother doing their jobs. If the system is too difficult for them, they can always quit.
 
What Emanuel wants to do is rate teachers by performance, to see how students improve in their classrooms.

And just how is Emanuel going to rate teachers by performance? How is he going to factor in in transience, parental apathy, learning disabilities, drug addiction, long-term abseentism, poverty, and/or limited English skills.

How is he going rate teacher performance in classes that don't have standardized tests?
 
That is not evidence of success. Studies have consistently shown that parents love charters, even when they don't perform better on any objective educational measurement.

A big problem is that they replace old neighborhood schools with small charters, which then push kids out to other crowded schools (sometimes with rival gangs).

Statistically, it is a wash. The Wiki says it best in this case:



Linky.

It is more a boring battle of ideology, and I don't like it.

I'm pretty much in agreement. Well said.
 
The line in bold near the top of the graphic:


The process is listed as taking from 2 to 5 years. The top three rows make up 2 years, and the appeals process is the rest. With 3 intermediate points where resolution can take place, it would be tough to argue that the supreme court part is 'typical' in any way. As WildCat stated, most cases don't even go to the first process, with sub-par teachers tolerated and shuffled around to avoid the process.
 
Last edited:
Charter schools have been quite successful, and are so popular that students literally must win a lottery to get in. The rest of the public schools, by contrast, are extremely poor performers and a big reason why middle class families move to the suburbs when they have children of school age.

That charter schools are going to save America's youth is one of the biggest myths in education these days. It's easy to get good test scores when you have the option of just throwing out the students who don't get them.
 
That charter schools are going to save America's youth is one of the biggest myths in education these days. It's easy to get good test scores when you have the option of just throwing out the students who don't get them.

Or maybe they just use resources more efficiently, like they don't build a school district administrative building that is more expensive than any of the 3 schools in that school district, and don't have bloated administration just to be fair towards those teachers who don't like or get tired of teaching. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
The process is listed as taking from 2 to 5 years. The top three rows make up 2 years, and the appeals process is the rest. With 3 intermediate points where resolution can take place, it would be tough to argue that the supreme court part is 'typical' in any way. As WildCat stated, most cases don't even go to the first process, with sub-par teachers tolerated and shuffled around to avoid the process.

Wildcat is assuming two things. First that the problem in Chicago schools is a large number of bad teachers. Second is that these bad teachers stay in the system. He hasn't proved either of these points.
 
Or maybe they just use resources more efficiently, like they don't build a school district administrative building that is more expensive than any of the 3 schools in that school district, and don't have bloated administration just to be fair towards those teachers who don't like or get tired of teaching. :rolleyes:

Geoffrey Canada who runs a bunch of charter schools in NYC kicked out his entire first class of middle school students when they didn’t get good enough test scores to satisfy his board of trustees.

And he get's paid $400,000 a year!

You can read more about the myth of charter schools here:

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2010/nov/11/myth-charter-schools/?page=1
 
How are teacher's unions the source of the failings of public education when these same unions were around 20, 30, 40 years ago....back when schools and teachers were "good"?
 
Geoffrey Canada who runs a bunch of charter schools in NYC kicked out his entire first class of middle school students when they didn’t get good enough test scores to satisfy his board of trustees.

And he get's paid $400,000 a year!

You can read more about the myth of charter schools here:

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2010/nov/11/myth-charter-schools/?page=1

It depends how you implement charter school system, badly implemented system can create almost as bad incentives as public school system. School choice is much better than rewarding them based on statistics.
 
It depends how you implement charter school system, badly implemented system can create almost as bad incentives as public school system. School choice is much better than rewarding them based on statistics.

Here's my problem with school choice. It's one thing to give someone a voucher to use at the new charter school opening up the street. It's another thing for someone taking that voucher and using it at the new scientologist school or the fundamentalist Mormon school.

I don't want my tax dollars used to fund religious education. Folks want a religious education for their kids, let them pay for it.
 
Here's my problem with school choice. It's one thing to give someone a voucher to use at the new charter school opening up the street. It's another thing for someone taking that voucher and using it at the new scientologist school or the fundamentalist Mormon school.

I don't want my tax dollars used to fund religious education. Folks want a religious education for their kids, let them pay for it.

You could equally argue that state is oppressing freedom of religion of religious people who pay taxes, and who would prefer that their tax money is used to religious education rather than leftist agenda education in average public school, or freedom of non-religious people who don't like leftist brainwashing and forcing them to pay twice for their kids education, first in property taxes, then in private school fees. Most Western countries (EDIT: Actually it seems that all other Western countries fund some religious schools) recognize this fact and allow state funding based on "money follows the child" principle of some religious school. Usually there are some conditions added though, like allowing potential students who are not member of that religious organization to apply, and some other standards.
 
Last edited:
And just how is Emanuel going to rate teachers by performance? How is he going to factor in in transience, parental apathy, learning disabilities, drug addiction, long-term abseentism, poverty, and/or limited English skills.

How is he going rate teacher performance in classes that don't have standardized tests?
We're not paying teachers to be baby sitters. You could always get a job at a day care center if that's what you'd rather be doing.
 
Wildcat is assuming two things. First that the problem in Chicago schools is a large number of bad teachers. Second is that these bad teachers stay in the system. He hasn't proved either of these points.
I have never claimed bad teachers were "the" problem with Chicago schools. It's certainly one of the problems, but certainly not the only one.

Getting rid of bad teachers is part of the solution to our pathetic schools. I've already pointed out that the school day and school year here are the shortest in the country. There's bloated administration. There's the need to be flexible with teaching methods and curriculum, and the ability to collect statistics so we can see what is working and what isn't working.

The CTU, by and large, opposes all of these things.
 
Geoffrey Canada who runs a bunch of charter schools in NYC kicked out his entire first class of middle school students when they didn’t get good enough test scores to satisfy his board of trustees.
Good for him! far better to send those who don't want to be there somewhere else, where they won't disrupt the education of the students who actually want to learn. Why should the good students have to be the ones getting sent elsewhere, and then only if they win a lottery or happen to live in the "good" school boundary?
 
We're not paying teachers to be baby sitters. You could always get a job at a day care center if that's what you'd rather be doing.

This doesn't address what I posted. Again, how is Emanuel going to rate teachers on performance? New teachers have a lot of enthusiasm but not many skills. That takes two to three years to develop. In those first years are these new teachers "bad"? What about a veteran teacher who takes on a student teacher? It's still the vet's name on the report card and tests. We know the student teacher isn't going to do such a great job. Is that vet teacher now "bad"?

You could have the best teacher in the entire world but if a student is disruptive, absent often or has poor English skills how is that the teacher's fault? What exactly, precisely makes a teacher "bad"?

It's a cop-out to say "bad teachers" should go, but not provide any fair way to determine who these individuals are. You don't seem to have the answers and neither does Emanuel.
 

Back
Top Bottom