[dawn]

Sorry if this comes across as harsh. (no, just immature and misguided)

Oops, not really.
Errr, and when have the schools (or any government entity or private corporation for that matter) ever had a budget surplus? They always want to cut salaries.
I have to admit the people I know in the educational field are college level (two brothers-in-law and a niece's husband are college professors, and various friends), but for the most part my impression has been that educators like to learn as well as educate. How many technophobe teachers do you personally know who are still teaching?
And how many teachers in MCAS are making $90K? How many are making double the starting salary?
...and some of us consider these to be basic rights. So which protected groups do you want to discriminate against? Older people? Women? Or do you prefer discriminating based on race or religion?

Hey, and the wimmin should be home havin' babies instead of takin' a job away from a man. And those folks wit' those funny religions gettin' days off for Ramydan an' Chanukka, why should we put up with dem?

Because it's the right thing to do, and it's one of the reasons this is a great country. Duh.

Boy, you obviously did not graduate with a degree in comprehension, cuz, Dave, you sure do miss the point, and take things out of context. So, great one, what is your solution? As for me, I have seen far too many educators that are indeed technophobes, as you put it. Reality is this, ineffective employees are not doing anyone any good, regardless as to what their label might be. Far too many times you have been quick to use the discrimination card on anything stated here. You insult the intelligence of those who would dare to speak some semblance of truth. That is so old school! No one should lose their job due to budget cuts, that is a sad reality, but it is a reality. But, on the other hand, an ineffective program is a failing program is a strain on the budget. I believe the point in all of this, is this; If you are going to trim the fat, then trim the greatest amount of fat, and especially the fat that is ineffective in the frying pan.

Maybe no teachers should be cut, instead, more creative inventive ways to trim the fat could be in place. Like does MCAS really need that many administrators? Do they really need ineffective reading programs? Do they really need all the after school programs? Do they really need so many buildings that are only 2/3 capacity? Do they really need a curriculum coach and a Director of curriculum? The list goes on and on. Oh, how about this one, pay to play, or better yet, pay to go to school?

Could you please have a logical conversation? You obviously humored yourself here!
"Duh, rolleyes,"? Are you a prepubescent child, talk to the hand, Whatever! Oh, and a nananana pooh pooh too, (thought I would match your eloquence)

Okay, I am done...be well!

[dawn]

It might not be on age per se, but in this day and age if something affects a group disproportionally, it is considered discrimination against said group. Because rules like that would affect pretty much just older teachers, I would imagine at very least we would see lawsuits over the issue, which would quickly eat up any cost savings.

For the record, I think what you are talking about is a good idea, I just don't see how it could be implemented.

Now you are talking southsider! you got the point!

[dawn]

Not harsh at all.

I don't know how many MCAS teachers are making $90K. That and $45K were just numbers for argument's sake.

I don't prefer discrimination of any kind. However, it takes a rather enlightened society to voluntarily not discriminate. American society does not qualify as such a society because non-discrimination here is had in large part by force of law and punishment. When "nobody's lookin'" there be all kinds of discrimination.

I'll repeat one of my points as it relates to that: if we fail to "enlighten" the next generation, we can eventually kiss such rights goodbye altogether, because a war on discrimination will fare no better than a war on drugs, 'cuz "the right thing to do" cain't be legislat'd.

You know what's another "right thing to do"? To step aside after you've had a long, productive life, and let younger people have their chance. I'm not in personally in MCAS, but I've spoken with people in it who tell me there are plenty teachers there past their prime who aren't worth their salaries, sitting with cushy core positions, and they know damned well nobody can make them budge. Are they within their almighty "rights"? Damn straight. Are they doing anybody but themselves a favor? Ditto.

The reason this was a great country is because it was a great people. There's nothing either magical or even merely alive in laws and principles. They're quite inert save in the hearts and actions of great people. Let's hope our lives are breathing the same life into them which our ancestors once did, the benefits of which the last couple generations have been quick to claim and trademark, but not replenish.

<hr>
I am so glad that the few of us who care enough to speak our minds on here all agree with each other. We are all saying the same thing. My experience here is this; far too many educators at the time of RIFing who are past the tenure point, walk around all high headed and do not fear. They do and say as they wish. No one in any profession, should be so sure. It does create a climate of complacency for some. Another disease in education; communities cut off their noses to spite their face. Be very careful that you do not do that. Identifying a problem, accepting it, and then changing it is the best way to invoke change, and from the looks of it, there does need to be change. Good job gentlemen. (oops, I just grouped, my bad)

[Dave]

Not harsh at all.

Dusk, I think you, unlike some of the smaller minded members on our little message board, can understand that when I attack your words I am not attacking you.

While I can appreciate the suggestion that some of the older teachers may be "dead wood" and may need to be removed, that criteria really isn't a function of age. Incompetence may be found in the teacher with the greatest seniority, or it could be found in an office secretary who steals office supplies and looks at internet porn when s/he should be working.

I'm just saying that firing people because they've been on the job for a long time and have accumulated salary increases is going to be difficult because not only does it amount to age discrimination (which can apply to anyone over 40, IIRC), but it seems like penalizing someone for their loyalty to the school/corporation/employer. Not to mention that someone can have 25 years experience as a teacher and only be 50 -- heck, I can see mandatory retirement at 65, or 40 years on the job, or something, but 50 years old?

I don't know how many MCAS teachers are making $90K. That and $45K were just numbers for argument's sake.

Yeah, but the numbers are relevant. I honestly don't know what the difference in pay scale is between the most recently hired teacher and the teacher with the most seniority, so if the difference is only 10% that is a different story than if the difference is 100%.

Possibly one of our gentle readers could pipe in with some hard numbers, but until we get hard numbers we're just talking out of our butts.

I don't prefer discrimination of any kind. However, it takes a rather enlightened society to voluntarily not discriminate. American society does not qualify as such a society because non-discrimination here is had in large part by force of law and punishment. When "nobody's lookin'" there be all kinds of discrimination.

Oh, come on -- show me anywhere in human history a culture which would qualify as enlightened under your criteria.

I would suggest a society is its laws, and our laws prohibiting discrimination show that we are more enlightened than many countries/societies are today, and that we are absolutely more enlightened as a society than we were 50 years ago.

I'll repeat one of my points as it relates to that: if we fail to "enlighten" the next generation, we can eventually kiss such rights goodbye altogether, because a war on discrimination will fare no better than a war on drugs, 'cuz "the right thing to do" cain't be legislat'd.

Yeah, and murder is against the law too, but people seem to keep doing it. I'm not in favor of decriminalizing murder, however, just as I'm against legalizing discrimination based on age, gender, race, religion, or national origin.

What kind of message would you be sending the next generation if you tell them, "Well, on this occasion we decided for budgetary reasons discriminating against people on the basis of age was OK"?

You know what's another "right thing to do"? To step aside after you've had a long, productive life, and let younger people have their chance. I'm not in personally in MCAS, but I've spoken with people in it who tell me there are plenty teachers there past their prime who aren't worth their salaries, sitting with cushy core positions, and they know damned well nobody can make them budge. Are they within their almighty "rights"? Damn straight. Are they doing anybody but themselves a favor? Ditto.

No doubt true. Offer them early retirement incentives (I seem to recall reading that the schools in La Porte are doing this, and it's going to have a net positive effect on their budget), and if they don't take the package, stick them in a classroom with those 60 kids you were talking about and let them earn their keep.

The reason this was a great country is because it was a great people. There's nothing either magical or even merely alive in laws and principles. They're quite inert save in the hearts and actions of great people. Let's hope our lives are breathing the same life into them which our ancestors once did, the benefits of which the last couple generations have been quick to claim and trademark, but not replenish.

I'm not sure I agree with the use of the past tense there, but I generally support the sentiment.

[dusk]

While I can appreciate the suggestion that some of the older teachers may be "dead wood" and may need to be removed, that criteria really isn't a function of age. Incompetence may be found in the teacher with the greatest seniority, or it could be found in an office secretary who steals office supplies and looks at internet porn when s/he should be working.

That's why I keep saying let's make it be a function of passing tests (aka demonstrating competence/skill). But you keep insisting that testing discriminates by age. I disagree, because not all older teachers would fail the test. Given that, testing discriminates by competence/skill, not age.

Age discrimination consists of being selective by age itself. E.g. "if you're over 60", "if you're under 5", etc. The testing I'm talking about wouldn't even ask for one's age. Rather, it would (for the "is competent to teach high school math" version, for example) ask things like, "what is the ratio of a circle's circumference to its radius?"

How does the likes of that discriminate by age?

I'm just saying that firing people because they've been on the job for a long time and have accumulated salary increases is going to be difficult because not only does it amount to age discrimination (which can apply to anyone over 40, IIRC), but it seems like penalizing someone for their loyalty to the school/corporation/employer. Not to mention that someone can have 25 years experience as a teacher and only be 50 -- heck, I can see mandatory retirement at 65, or 40 years on the job, or something, but 50 years old?

I don't disagree, but you're arguing against something I didn't say. I've not recommended firing people as a function of their longevity: I've recommended giving position priority to those who can demonstrate relatively superior skill in their field.

Yeah, but the numbers are relevant. I honestly don't know what the difference in pay scale is between the most recently hired teacher and the teacher with the most seniority, so if the difference is only 10% that is a different story than if the difference is 100%.

Possibly one of our gentle readers could pipe in with some hard numbers, but until we get hard numbers we're just talking out of our butts.

I suspect the difference is closer to 100% than 10%. Are teacher salaries supposed to be public knowledge? (I don't know.)

Oh, come on -- show me anywhere in human history a culture which would qualify as enlightened under your criteria.

I would suggest a society is its laws, and our laws prohibiting discrimination show that we are more enlightened than many countries/societies are today, and that we are absolutely more enlightened as a society than we were 50 years ago.
Yeah, and murder is against the law too, but people seem to keep doing it. I'm not in favor of decriminalizing murder, however, just as I'm against legalizing discrimination based on age, gender, race, religion, or national origin.

I suppose we'll be at an impasse so long as you keep insisting that testing discriminates by age, a position with which I disagree. Perhaps the issue would be clearer if we were talking about airplane safety inspectors instead of people <sarcasm> merely entrusted with the development of the next generation </sarcasm> ?

What kind of message would you be sending the next generation if you tell them, "Well, on this occasion we decided for budgetary reasons discriminating against people on the basis of age was OK"?
No doubt true. Offer them early retirement incentives (I seem to recall reading that the schools in La Porte are doing this, and it's going to have a net positive effect on their budget), and if they don't take the package, stick them in a classroom with those 60 kids you were talking about and let them earn their keep.

More argument against something I'm not advocating. But that's okay. You're making good points. It's just that, from my point of view, they're irrelevant to what I'm proposing.

[Dave]

That's why I keep saying let's make it be a function of passing tests (aka demonstrating competence/skill). But you keep insisting that testing discriminates by age. I disagree, because not all older teachers would fail the test. Given that, testing discriminates by competence/skill, not age.

Age discrimination consists of being selective by age itself. E.g. "if you're over 60", "if you're under 5", etc. The testing I'm talking about wouldn't even ask for one's age. Rather, it would (for the "is competent to teach high school math" version, for example) ask things like, "what is the ratio of a circle's circumference to its radius?"

How does the likes of that discriminate by age?

My, my. How could I have gotten the impression you wanted to target the older teachers? Could it have been back in post #6 when you said:

1) Giving priority to newer, more qualified/certified teachers over more expensive "dead weight" likely grandfathered and/or cronied around qualification/certification standards.

and....

3) Giving priority to those further from retirement.

How can that conceivably NOT discriminate by age?

[Ang]

So, every June the teachers are tested. They are assigned random numbers and all testing materials are marked with the numbers. The tests are different based on specific subjects, yet should contain "general" questions included on all tests--things concerning classroom behavior, etc.

Once the tests are completed and graded, the numbers are matched with the appropriate teacher and they are given a number score based on test results.

The teachers with the best scores stay, the worst go. Other things to factor in are overall pass/fail ratio, discipline and attendance, and student participation. It should not just be a matter of "is the teacher qualified to teach this material?" but should also factor in if the teacher is qualified to teach the material. Are the students really learning?

It's a great theory but will never happen. Trust me on this. As long as there is an MCEA this "scoring" for retention will never happen.

[dusk]

My, my. How could I have gotten the impression you wanted to target the older teachers? Could it have been back in post #6 when you said:
and....
How can that conceivably NOT discriminate by age?

Obviously *those* statements do.

But I somehow - obviously mistakenly - imagined that a discussion was something that moved forward, and thus I altered and clarified as I went. Am I allowed to do that in the course of a thread, Dave, or do I need to re-register with a new login in order to communicate an improved position on something?

My current thinking is that it would be best to determine which teachers are kept by certification/testing without any reference to age.

Any interest in discussing that? Or would you prefer to keep announcing "DUSK == AGE DISCRIMINATION!!!" ?

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[eric.hanke]

France A. Córdova, the President of Purdue University, is on the campus of PNC today.



Guess some big faculty announcement regarding school finances is today!!!

[dusk]

So, every June the teachers are tested. They are assigned random numbers and all testing materials are marked with the numbers. The tests are different based on specific subjects, yet should contain "general" questions included on all tests--things concerning classroom behavior, etc.

Once the tests are completed and graded, the numbers are matched with the appropriate teacher and they are given a number score based on test results.

The teachers with the best scores stay, the worst go. Other things to factor in are overall pass/fail ratio, discipline and attendance, and student participation. It should not just be a matter of "is the teacher qualified to teach this material?" but should also factor in if the teacher is qualified to teach the material. Are the students really learning?

It's a great theory but will never happen. Trust me on this. As long as there is an MCEA this "scoring" for retention will never happen.

I do trust you, seeing as how I keep discovering the unspoken motto of Michigan City to be "will never happen".

Thank you for deepening my understanding as to why the so-called "beach millionaires" might want nothing to do with Michigan City.

[dawn]

The smaller minds to which you refer?

I believe it is you that began to play a vernacular game by directly mocking someone elses reference to newer more qualified educators. It is you that is out of touch with reality. There has been a new influx of educators who have in fact been lured away from other industries to share their wealth of knowledge and life experience in the classroom. A new graduate from an accredited educational program may be any age. You placed your assumptions over and over again upon those of us who have written our perspectives. I think it is wise for you to go back and reread your immature interpretations.

I believe that I too will go back on here, change my name, and again attempt to engage in some degree of discourse with those who care to think in an open minded approach. It seems to me that upon my first attempt on here a few months back I was side-lined and insulted by the same writer. Hmmm, interesting, is it safe to say that maybe someone on here is a misoginist?

Openly mocking someone's believe is in fact small minded. Reread what you wrote, before you continue to label, and insult.

[Dave]

Obviously *those* statements do.

But I somehow - obviously mistakenly - imagined that a discussion was something that moved forward, and thus I altered and clarified as I went. Am I allowed to do that in the course of a thread, Dave, or do I need to re-register with a new login in order to communicate an improved position on something?

Did I miss where you altered your earlier statements? Something like an "Oops, I guess that wouldn't be a good thing" statement?

I have absolutely no problem with merit testing for any job. On the other hand, I do have a problem with RIFing people with the folks who have been on the job longest getting fired because they've been there longest.

As for an additional username, I'm not sure that's a good idea. CBTL board management tends to frown on multiple user accounts.

My current thinking is that it would be best to determine which teachers are kept by certification/testing without any reference to age.

You and I would appear to be in agreement then.

Any interest in discussing that? Or would you prefer to keep announcing "DUSK == AGE DISCRIMINATION!!!" ?

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Now that you've clarified/altered your earlier position, I don't think it needs to be further addressed.

[dusk]

Did I miss where you altered your earlier statements? Something like an "Oops, I guess that wouldn't be a good thing" statement?

Here's what happened. In my mind I never intended to discriminate by age. I was into the testing thing. But when I wrote about it, I included a statement or two that basically said "discriminate by age" - only I couldn't see that, because internally my thoughts were all about testing.

Then you pointed out what my verbiage basically had to mean, and I was bewildered, because it wasn't what I had set out to express.

So I never felt a need to clarify ala "I guess that wouldn't be a good thing", because what you were taking to be my main point was, to me, mostly unnecessary extra verbiage I included while trying to express the testing thing.

So now that *I* better understand what I wrote, I will say without hesitation that discriminating by age wouldn't be a good thing.

I have absolutely no problem with merit testing for any job. On the other hand, I do have a problem with RIFing people with the folks who have been on the job longest getting fired because they've been there longest.

Amen!

As for an additional username, I'm not sure that's a good idea. CBTL board management tends to frown on multiple user accounts.

How would they know?

You and I would appear to be in agreement then.
Now that you've clarified/altered your earlier position, I don't think it needs to be further addressed.

I don't know... I think I just saw one of the hooves twitch.... ;-)

[Dave]

Amen!

Sing it, brother!

How would they know?

Ve haf our vays.... BWA HA HA HA!!!

I don't know... I think I just saw one of the hooves twitch.... ;-)

[Dr. McCoy] It's dead, Jim![/Dr. McCoy]

[dusk]

Ve haf our vays.... BWA HA HA HA!!!

Yeah? Is there, like, a history of pranksta-ism in these parts?

[Dave]

Yeah? Is there, like, a history of pranksta-ism in these parts?

Getting a little off topic, but spammers get on every message board. We currently have 309 listed members, but the most recent signer-on is user number 1008. Lots of spammers out there.

[Southsider2k12]

Yeah? Is there, like, a history of pranksta-ism in these parts?

Actually part of the reason we record IPs is so that there is the promise of a honest conversation, as compared to something like the News Dispatch website where one person could make 20 posts under 20 names and make it look like a conversation, instead of just the rantings of just one nutjob, like they really are.

[eric.hanke]

Sure would be nice to watch the meeting online tonight... Guess we haven't figured out mastered the technology yet. (snicker)

[Southsider2k12]

Sure would be nice to watch the meeting online tonight... Guess we haven't figured out mastered the technology yet. (snicker)

no joke. I wonder if being at Elston screwed them up?

[eric.hanke]

no joke. I wonder if being at Elston screwed them up?

The meeting location should not matter. Each school is connected with the same high-speed fiber. Either there were technicial difficulties due to lack of testing, the need to make the meeting available online was an oversight, OR it was determined not to make the meeting available online. Take your pick.



So much for community involvement.