Candidate and school board chairman Ron Margiotta held firm to his opposition to the use of achievement schools as he touched on student assignment and other matters today.
In an interview today with conservative WPTF talk show host Bill LuMaye, Margiotta said parents all across the county, including those in Southeast Raleigh, have indicated they want neighborhood schools. He pointed to how parents on the online test drive overwhelmingly chose their closest school.
"Parents want to be close to home and as far as I'm concerned every school in this county should be a high-achieving school," Margiotta said. "And I think that's what our goal should be: to make every school high achieving, not just ones in the suburbs. or not just our magnet schools within the cities, wherever they may be.
That's the direction we should be taking, concentrating on making every school a high achieving school and we can do it and we're going to. It's unacceptable to say that we're going to move these children to an achievement school. Why shouldn't every school be an achievement school?"
Margiotta's remarks came after LuMaye accused Superintendent Tony Tata of speaking for Southeast Raleigh parents by suggesting they should be allowed to go to achievement schools in the suburbs.
"What about the schools where they live?" LuMaye asked Margiotta. "Aren't they high performing? Shouldn't they be high performing? Do families in Southeast Raleigh want to travel to the other side of the county? Don't they too want neighborhood schools?
Not discussed was the impact on the magnet school program if the achievement schools were dropped and all the Southeast Raleigh families went to their closest school.
The interview opened with LuMaye asking Margiotta about David Holdzkom losing his position of assistant superintendent of evaluation and research. Margiotta said he couldn't discuss it because it's a personnel matter.
That topic transformed into a discussion of the school board majority's efforts to increase Algebra I placement in eighth grade. As the data presented Thursday shows, there have been gains in placement among all groups, particularly among low-income and minority students.
"Since the 2009 elections, the school board has been very committed to improving the lot of the lower income students," Margiotta said. "Quite frankly they accuse us of some of the things that they are so guilty of, of discriminating against students because of their income level."
Margiotta said he believes the lower income students weren't placed in the past because of the mistaken belief that the children couldn't succeed.
"It's sad about how many children were lost along the way," Margiotta said.
Margiotta stressed how test scores have been stable even with the increase in enrollment.
Moving to the budget, Margiotta took a shot at Gov. Bev Perdue and former Commissioner Stan Norwalk, whom he called "the prophets of doom." Despite the dire warnings from Perdue about the consequences of overriding her budget, Margiotta pointed to how Wake is expanding foreign language in middle school, expanding the STEM program and adding 300 more teachers.
"That's remarkable," LuMaye responded. "I'm tired of the sky is falling people."
The school board will have budget challenges next year when it can no longer use the $28 million in left-over federal stimulus money to pay for teachers.
Comments
<continuation of earlier
Thu, 09/01/2011 - 02:19 — jeffrey1<continuation of earlier thread>
The people who own their own business shouldn't really be involved in a comparison with teachers...You're comparing teachers to CEOs and owners, when that isn't accurate.
Again, I have to go back to the topic of this discussion. If you want to argue that teachers work hard, work outside the classroom, have to work with whomever is assigned to them, etc., and deserved to be paid more -- I get that, and I agree with you. But that's not what this discussion is about. This discussion is about TIME. It's about whether you need to place an additional burden (however small) on your customer/client in order to perform the duties of your job.
There are perks to business. Many people have the option to work from home some or all of the time. If they are involved on an important project, there are often bonuses or other special recognitions waiting at the end. There are long lunches when things at the office aren't bustling quite as much.
There are perks to just about every occupation. Your definition of a small business owner as someone who simply takes a bag of money to the bank deposit every day is ludicrous. Here's the real picture:
There were 27,757,676 small business owners with no payroll in the United States, i.e. they are 1 person operations (In comparison, there are ere 3,823,142 teachers in public, charter, private, and Catholic elementary and secondary schools).
Small Business Owners often take out huge loans or pile up massive credit card debt in order to get a business started. They don't have the luxury of a guaranteed paycheck every week. They don't get benefits unless they purchase them. They often lose money while starting out. They live with constant uncertainty. They are carpenters, electricians, housekeepers, child care providers, etc.
The Small Business Administration states that 30% of new businesses fail during the first two years of being open, 50% during the first five years and 66% during the first 10. The SBA goes on to state that only 25% make it to 15 years or more.
With the early-release Wednesdays, the county was making a statement that teachers are an important part of the schools that often is overlooked.
Wrong. We all know that the teacher is the most important part of school. No one overlooks that. This was a rushed decision. This was Burns' little pet project, and in keeping with the tradition of those who came before him, he gave little regard to how it might affect families.
In return, some parents whined and complained because it wasn't perfect for them.
While others hired sitters and care/providers, made arrangements with neighbors, or made special arrangements with their own employers
That lady could quit her job tomorrow, find another one, and probably not have to move.....teachers have to either go private or switch districts.
Please. Now your ignorance is on full display. You'd think we were in the middle of a booming economic expansion listening to you. You realize that unemployment is over 9%, and that the real unemployment rate is over 16%, right? You realize that companies aren't hiring because of all the economic uncertainty, right? You realize that it's nearly impossible to make any lateral move, and keep the same salary and benefits when you're 50 years old (in good times or bad), right?
.....teachers have to either go private or switch districts.
According to Bureau of Labor Statistics, teaching is one of the occupations with the largest expected job growth through 2018. You can live in Wake and work in several surrounding districts, or choose from hundreds of private, charter, etc schools.
I wrote a response, then I
Thu, 09/01/2011 - 14:06 — danofncI wrote a response, then I deleted it.
I'm done with this...at least for this time.
Reeks of hypocrisy....
Mon, 08/22/2011 - 09:08 — bpuli9999Busing for diversity is the biggest no-no ever, but busing for "achievement" is fine? Even though nobody knows what "achievement" is? And how variable that could be? If an "achievement school" is no longer that, will all the kids be bussed to another one? Can folks opt-out of being forcibly bussed for achievement?
What...
Mon, 08/22/2011 - 09:11 — KevPerdueI guess you don't understand the busing for achievement has one factor that busing for diversity didn't.....parental choice! That right...you went to Chapel Hill....I wouldn't expect you to understand the difference!
Don't know what schools...
Mon, 08/22/2011 - 09:43 — bpuli9999you attended - you certainly can't read or understand. That was my question. Can one opt out of forced bussing for achievement? If you don't know - shut up.
And yes, I was in Chapel Hill yesterday. And I guess you went to Johnston county (unlikely that you would get that, but it is worth a try).
"Can one opt out of forced
Mon, 08/22/2011 - 12:14 — woodstock"Can one opt out of forced bussing for achievement?"
It is not an opt out situation. According to a presentation delivered at the most recent work session available on WRAL, there is no forced busing to achievement schools, They are merely a choice -- an option -- available to students who are in proximity of a magnet school, but who are not granted a seat at the magnet school. Of course it all still preliminary... and it is anyone's guess what the final plan will look like.
The best way to end this entire argument
Mon, 08/22/2011 - 13:29 — FSandYOUis to end bussing all together. With the gloom & doom report slated for next year's budget, the only thing left to cut will be teachers or busses. I think it's past time we wake up and make the parents responsible for transportation. If you choose not to join in and support that then your teacher will be the first in line to go next year.
Good for everyone? Problem solved on 2 fronts then.
good for none
Thu, 09/01/2011 - 09:51 — EBDarcyI'm assuming you are joking because that idea is silly. Let's see, there are 700 families at the elementary school near me. Taking into account the kids who might walk or carpool, you are talking about hundreds of cars in carpool everyday. Maybe 300 in a school that size? Yes, just what we need...more cars on the road around every school. More accidents, more traffic conjestion that already exists around school at pick-up and drop-off. If people complained about their kids getting home an hour early on Wednesday imagine how they'd complain about this.
Nope...Not From Around Here...
Mon, 08/22/2011 - 11:42 — KevPerdueI got a good education at the K-12 and college level west of here (thank goodness).
P.S. Chapel Hill is not that impressive to a lot of people that have been outside of NC. Do you travel much? Based on the comments you have made about New Jersey, Kansas, etc indicate you need to get out more!
True...
Mon, 08/22/2011 - 12:23 — Bob_SconceOne of the reasons UNC isn't that well known outside of the state is because it's so hard to get into from out-of-state --you either have to be at the very top of your class or play football. As a result, unless you live in NC, you probably don't know anybody who went to UNC or who even applied -- all you know is the basketball team. And, frankly, the schools you recognize only from their sports programs generally aren't all that good. Because of that, nobody sees UNC in the same light as, say, UVa, Michigan or Maryland, even though UNC ranked 5th in the USNews survey.
Didn't realize I had...
Mon, 08/22/2011 - 11:57 — bpuli9999a fan that follows my travels, keeps track of where I go, what schools I attend, and (most importantly) postings on this forum. Do you keep copies too - for future reference.
Why don't you take your kids back to where you came from? Why leave such great schools for such shoddy ones?
And congratulations on your college degree - must have been a big achievement for someone like you.
So...
Mon, 08/22/2011 - 09:49 — Bob_SconceWe don't know yet. On first blush, the answer is yes -- your parents would simply choose a school that wasn't an 'achievement' school. But, it's possible that you may not get that choice, or the 2nd choice or . . . on and on until you're at an achievement school.
Since there's very little extra capacity in the system, that's probably going to happen to somebody. But, we don't know, since the plan isn't public yet.
Of course all schools should be achievement schools
Sat, 08/20/2011 - 23:00 — SatchHHBut RM is out of his mind if he thinks they'll get there under his leadership (lack of) or that of his handlers. Making sure all schools are good learning environments for all kids is step 1 and concentrating low SES kids in schools has been shown zillions of time to create POOR learning environments for kids - in the absence of mounds of $$ that RM is unwilling to ask for (again, leadership issue). Ron's ideas are sending us directly to have/have not schools. Ron is spouting a load of bull about these achievement schools and knows it. I just hope District 8 voters are smart enough to realize it. BTW - if Ron had bothered to attend one of the SE Raleigh forums last year (he didn't) he would have heard LOUD and CLEAR that the SE Raleigh community is in favor of the diversity policy and NOT strict neighborhood schools. ARGH Why don't folks listen to them!!!
...
Sun, 08/21/2011 - 09:00 — SideburnsYet the previous assignment policy that targeted poor and mostly minority children to fill quotas throughout our school system failed. It did not improve achievement and it caused much widespread frustration And those candidates who are completely deaf to that fact -- Kushner, Martin, Evans, Hill and Sutton -- will fail as well.
It is disingenuous for you to claim that the SE Raleigh community as a whole is in favor of the diversity policy and not neighborhood schools. The recent test drive results show parents from all over the county overwhelmingly want their children to attend school close to home. A new assignment model that provides choice to families would give everyone that opportunity. I don't understand why your candidates want to inhibit choice for some -- just because of their income level -- so others can have a menu of options.
Margiotta is very much in-tune with what parents want for their children. Choice, proximity and increased stability. All three are very important in a child's education and he knows that.
Sideburns - Have you read the Blue Plan?
Sun, 08/21/2011 - 20:39 — MrsPaintThe Blue Plan has nothing to do with income for placement in the choice model. Entry into Achievement schools have nothing to do with income. I know of no candidate that wants to inhibit choice for some due to an income level. That policy is gone, and has been for over a year. I understand from reading the blog you are a RM supporter, and his campaign manager, yes? I do not understand why you continue to speak of income as a selection criteria. You are the only candidate camp that is. The other candidates are talking about academic achievement. Saying the other candidates are referencing income as a selection criteria is incorrect. What they are saying is no low performing schools. That is two different things. RM sounds like he is running on a platform from the last school board election. I sincerely hope you respond, as I am confused on why RM wants you here throwing stones at the other candidates. I'd rather hear what he has in store for making every school a high achieving school with less money, since he plainly does not want to give low performing students access to high performing schools.
Don't understand?
Thu, 09/01/2011 - 01:28 — SDR256If you have spent even seven days reading this blog it is unforgivable if you say "I don't understand why any candidate would speak of income level". Please. This has been a big, drawn out fight to get to a place where academic achievement was even considered to come on the stage, much less center stage. It was ALL about income and (ahem- cough- sneeze - minority status) and whether 'those kids' could achieve - until about (what?) 10 days ago. Ten days ago, or so, the balwark against change, the cornerstone, anchor, ballast load of 'income level and minority status as indicator of achievement' - - - - just left! David Holdzkum was just, very very recently, given the hook from stage left from General Tata.
So, please understand, Ms. Paint - this is a new dawn. A new world and it is a happy one. Please forgive these candidates as they jockey for position in this new environment, but don't disrespect yourself by saying you don't understand why they are not speaking of income level. It just makes you look terribly, terribly uninformed.
I don't think that's accurate
Sun, 08/21/2011 - 21:13 — Bob_SconceThe Blue Plan had a number of "priorities" in assignment -- one of them was" Students from lower-performing areas whose first-choice school is designated as a high-performing school (i.e., achievement choice school)." While that doesn't specifically say anything about income, it is vulnerable to the criticism that "low-performing areas" are a proxy for "poor areas."
On the face of it, the idea seems bizarre --why should a student's choice of schools be influenced by how other kids in the neighborhood perform in school?
I don't think Ron has opposed allowing low-performing students to access "high-performing" (however that's defined) schools if they choose. But, there is a risk that if the new assignment plan does not provide enough spaces in schools which are proximate to low-income areas, then many low-income students will be pushed into their bottom-choice school, which could be a distant "achievement school." And, in the end, the actual assignment patterns would be very similar to the previous ones, again with poor kids going to schools that they didn't really want to.
no
Mon, 08/22/2011 - 14:50 — EBDarcyThat's one interpretation but that's not the one I think most people heard. Please correct me I'm wrong. He said a couple weeks ago that he (paraphrasing a bit) didn't think it was right to hold open seats in the better schools if that meant kids who lived closer cannot attend them. He didn't say he was concerned about students ending up in achievement schools because all their higher ranked choices were filled. But with the capacity issues involved the only way that seats at any very desirable schools will be available is by design.
why should a student's choice of school
Sun, 08/21/2011 - 22:18 — Solon77On the face of it, the idea seems bizarre --why should a student's choice of schools be influenced by how other kids in the neighborhood perform in school?
Here is a real example - new apartments went up in the neighborhood (base assignment area) The students were lower income and their assignment to the neighborhood ES pushed the F&R to 50%. Concerned parents wanted these kids reassigned to get the F&R% down. These concerned parents promptly went to a charter school. So you ask why a student's choice be influenced by other kids in the neighborhood ?
RM's concern is that seats in the achievement schools will be set aside for low performing students and that there will not be enough seats for the neighborhood kids, he is not concerned about the low performing students he is worried about not being able to fulfill the proximate school assignment.
Eh...
Sun, 08/21/2011 - 22:34 — Bob_SconceI was using "choice" as in "the set of options he has". I probably should have said "choices."
I'm suspicious of the concept of "achievement school," as if it were some immutable quality. Isn't the situation far more dynamic? What happens if the situation you describe comes to pass -- lots of seats set aside for low-performing kids, not enough for neighborhood kids. The kids who are transported from some distant location have the same issues with distance that current students do when they're transported: hard for parents to be involved, too much time spent on the bus, isolation from classmates, etc.... These students end up performing poorly, and before long the school is no longer an "achievement school." Then, a new school is identified as an "achievement school" and it starts all over.
Speaking of
Sun, 08/21/2011 - 14:17 — danofncSpeaking of disingenuous.....
It's incorrect for you to act like the three things you mention are very important to a child's education. It's incorrect to act like things that are important to parents are automatically important to a child's education. I firmly believe that having a good teacher who has all necessary tools and supplies to teach is much more important than any of your big three.
Parents are fickle. They always want new, innovative methods of teaching....right up until it means they might have to alter their vacation plans or **horror** pick their kids up an hour early once a week.
I also have a suggestion for you as it relates to your involvement with a campaign. Stop pressing the "choice" issue. If you keep making choice seem so important, it's going to hurt your candidate when people don't get their first choice.
or **horror** pick their
Mon, 08/22/2011 - 21:20 — jeffrey1or **horror** pick their kids up an hour early once a week.
Your continued belittling of a real problem for many parents is troublesome. You do realize that parents of low income children do not "pick up their kids" at school, don't you? Many kids rely on after school care (which costs $). Others make arrangements with neighbors and relatives. Wacky Wednesdays caused a lot of problems for some families, but you continue to make light of it.
After school care
Tue, 08/23/2011 - 21:41 — Dove314How does whether a parent paid for After School Care get mixed with the former Wacky Wednesday's? Did the After School Care programs not include the additional hour per week or was it included in the costs for Monday thru Friday after school care?
Everything comes with trade-offs. We can't demand that WCPSS make everything convenient and easy for parents while in turn demanding WCPSS make student achievement for all the priority. The message we, as parents, have sent is that we want convenience first and student achievement only as it fits in with convenience for parents.
How does whether a parent
Wed, 08/24/2011 - 02:33 — jeffrey1How does whether a parent paid for After School Care get mixed with the former Wacky Wednesday's?
Simple. I pay sitter by the hour. I get home at 6:00pm. Normal days, sitter is paid for working 2 1/2 hours (3:30 - 6:00). Wacky Wednesdays, sitter is paid for working 3 1/2 hours (2:30 - 6:00pm).
The message we, as parents, have sent is that we want convenience first and student achievement only as it fits in with convenience for parents.
No, the message is try and show a little common sense. MYR wasn't finalized until April, giving parents just 2 months to adjust.
Regarding Wacky Wednesdays, the previous board did not even allow for public comment on the policy. The policy was proposed AND approved in a single meeting, with little fanfare. Like MYR, it was done in April, just two months before the start of the YR school year.
Teachers routinely deal with up to 100 students a day. Wacky Wednesday gave them 60 minutes (36 seconds per student!) to collaborate with other teachers. In this case, the "tradeoff" was a whole lot of parental inconvenience for 36 seconds of PLC time per student. Not a very good trade.
Not true
Wed, 08/24/2011 - 13:37 — Dove314There was value from that time spent on PLC's while parents were inconvenienced. Several schools and some subject areas presented about how the time was of value and had a direct impact on student achievement. It may have only been 36 seconds per student but it was 36 seconds per student that yielded a return on investment of time spent and in less than the time it has taken the EDSATF and WCPSS staff to try to change Algebra I practices which is at 14 months and counting. Not only that, those 36 seconds benefitted far more than just one subject at one grade level. The presentations were sufficiently compelling that, the current BoE, after initialing voting to drop the PLC time altogether, felt compelled to find some way to try to fit the time back into the bell schedules despite it being very late in the game and again requiring all signs to be redone and more just so WCPSS could continue to spend those 36 seconds per student to further improve student achievement. The only real change to PLC's from then to now is it is more inconvenient for the teachers to make the most of those 36 seconds per student to maximize convenience to parents.
System > family. Got it?
Thu, 09/01/2011 - 01:39 — SDR256"There was value from that time spent on PLC's while parents were inconvenienced."
That sentence speaks volumes.
System > family
Got it.
I never said there wasn't
Wed, 08/24/2011 - 22:31 — jeffrey1I never said there wasn't any value. I said that the value was not worth inconveniencing parents over. Let's not pretend that every student got 36 seconds of attention during PLCs. Likely, it was a handful of students that were discussed, but it was every student that was sent home one hour early.
While I think that teaching is an honorable profession, and that teachers do much work outside the classroom, I also believe they are professionals. If one additional hour per week is really that valuable to success in the classroom, then teachers should give that one hour per week before or after the regular school day.
double
Thu, 08/25/2011 - 08:13 — danofncpost
How many hours per week do
Thu, 08/25/2011 - 08:11 — danofncHow many hours per week do you think the average teacher spends working? Not just in school, but also the time they spend at home doing school-related things......
At some point, we need to stop thinking that every little adjustment can come at the expense of teachers.
It wouldn't take long to come up with a quote from the standpoint of a teacher that would basically be the exact opposite of your last paragraph, and it would make just as much sense and be just as logical.
We've had this conversation
Fri, 08/26/2011 - 00:48 — jeffrey1We've had this conversation before.
I tell you what. If you can show me that the average teacher (working 9 months per year, 6-7 hours per day in school, plus x number of hours outside the school day) works more than the average professional (working 12 months per year, 9-10 hours per day, plus y number of hours outside the work day -- including phone calls and email while supposedly on vacation, plus z number of days away from family while traveling), then I might concede your point.
At some point, we need to stop thinking that every little adjustment can come at the expense of teachers.
We have a different view on the definition of "little." In our society, businesses adapt to the needs of their customers, not the other way around. Dentists and doctors have office hours on Saturdays. Insurance salesman, and investment professionals meet their clients on their clients schedules. Grocery stores are open on holidays, and many are open 24 hours per day. The list goes on and on.
The role of a teacher is to teach their clients. We've been shown that effective teaching should include some time amongst teachers for PLCs. If teachers need to take part in PLCs, those PLCs should not come at any expense to the client.
It's not a business. The
Fri, 08/26/2011 - 23:37 — danofncIt's not a business. The kids aren't customers. Neither are the parents.
You're a tutor, right? You have the option of saying "I am unable to make your child learn, you should find someone else". Teachers don't have that option. They have to deal with every kid that comes through the door.
If it was a business, the schools could cater to certain kids without trying to appeal to everyone. Harris Teeter, for example, has a different target market than Food Lion.
It doesn't matter how long a grocery store is open, because the same people don't work the entire time that it's open.
The dentists and doctors that are open on Saturdays normally charge a premium for those unusual hours. Our pediatrician has Saturday hours, but only in an office that is much farther away than normal and at more cost.
The first bell rings at 8:45 at our school. Dismissal is at 3:45. Since that's 7 hours, I'll have to go see which teachers are getting to school half an hour late and leaving half an hour early every day. For some reason, I think that most of them are there an hour before the first bell and stay 1/2 to an hour (minimum) after dismissal. Oh yeah...because I've seen them there on multiple occasions.
I have a hard time believing the average professional works 9-10 hour days.
It's not a business. The
Mon, 08/29/2011 - 03:05 — jeffrey1It's not a business. The kids aren't customers. Neither are the parents.
I'm sorry, it is a business. It's an organization engaged in providing a service to consumers. Sure you can say that education is different from selling wheelbarrows. But then selling wheelbarrows is different than writing software.
You're a tutor, right? You have the option of saying "I am unable to make your child learn, you should find someone else".
In over 10 years of tutoring, I have never used that "option." I could teach calculus to a stick. And I back it all up with money back guarantees. Yes, I'm that good. In fact, I would love to make the move into the classroom. There's a lot of professionals in the private community that wouldn't mind sharing their expertise by making a lateral move into education. The reason I don't (and many others don't) is because the education system says that if I make than move, then I have to go back to school and get a degree, or license,to "learn" how to teach.
Your reciting of the Blueberry Story does not hold water with me (I actually worte the author of that story to tell him the same thing). This discussion has to do with the time spent by a professional to perform the duties of the job, not how difficult that job may be. And you haven't convinced me that teachers (as a whole) are putting in more hours or making greater sacrifices than professionals working for private companies. Can you find an occasional case where a teacher works far above and beyond what is required? Sure. But I think that's the exception, not the rule.
The first bell rings at 8:45 at our school. Dismissal is at 3:45. Since that's 7 hours, I'll have to go see which teachers are getting to school half an hour late and leaving half an hour early every day.
It depends on how you want to measure time. The average workday for a professional may be from 8:00 to 5:00, but I would not say that a professional that is present during those hours is actually working 9 hours. What about the professional that spends 12 hours in transit back and forth to a meeting in Los Angeles. Do you think he's being paid for that?
I have a hard time believing the average professional works 9-10 hour days.
You need to get our more. Every professional I have ever known easily spends 10 hours a day and more on the job. Every professional I know puts in time on the weekends, and seems to be glued to their blackberries and email accounts. And there are the small business owners. There are 28 million non-employer (i.e. no payroll) firms in the US. Ask these guys about the length of their work week.
We may as well just agree to
Mon, 08/29/2011 - 14:43 — danofncWe may as well just agree to disagree. I see differences that, IMO, you are refusing to acknowledge/respect. You seem to think that comparing teachers with any other professionals is apples to apples, and I think it's not. Circles ensue.
Of course you wouldn't consider a professional to have worked 9 hours if they work 8 to 5. They get an hour for lunch (at least). Teachers get ~20 minutes, and sometimes that time is used for parent conferences instead of eating.
Most teachers are at school every day 1 hour before and 1 hour after the bells, minimum. You said teachers are working 6-7 hours, but they are spending 9 at school. At least 7 (minus 20 minutes) of those hours are spent with children in the classroom....so where does the 6 come from?
All of your "Every professional I know...." lines are either hyperbole or bad signs for the professionals you know.
That professional that is taking a 12 hour trip to LA gets his plane, hotel and expenses covered, right? Is that the same or different than the teacher who doesn't get to travel but does get to spend their own money on supplies that the district can't afford? It seems like the professional has a pretty good deal.....especially since I don't know of very many professionals making $40k that spend a ton of time traveling for meetings.
Most teachers are at school
Mon, 08/29/2011 - 22:40 — jeffrey1Most teachers are at school every day 1 hour before and 1 hour after the bells, minimum. You said teachers are working 6-7 hours, but they are spending 9 at school. At least 7 (minus 20 minutes) of those hours are spent with children in the classroom....so where does the 6 come from?
I believe your kids are still in ES. You're right, there is a lot of hand holding that is done in ES with lunch duty, and carpool lanes, and bus dropoff/pickup. But the school day is still just 6 hours long, and teachers teach for at most 6 hours per day, usually less as they get planning periods when the kids are in art/music/PE. I remember having lunch regularly with my kids' 2nd grade teacher, and we had more than 20 minutes.
You'll find that it all goes away in MS and HS. No teachers at carpool, No teachers at bus dropoff/pickup, no teachers at lunch. In HS, teachers teach three 90 minute classes per day. That's 4 1/2 hours per day.
All of your "Every professional I know...." lines are either hyperbole or bad signs for the professionals you know.
I'll pick 5 professionals off the top of my head:
Professional #1 - Works at Quintiles. Is up at 5:00am answering emails. Leaves for work at 6:00am. Doesn't get home until 6:00pm. Helps son with homework until 9:00pm. Brings work home with her and works on it from 9:00pm to 11:00pm.
Professional #2 - Helps to build and enhance airports all over the world. All work is onsite, and is normally traveling 3 weeks out of every 4. Latest job is in San Diego, but work can be anywhere in the world. Frequently catches the red-eye.
Professional #3 - Works for Sysco, supplying restaurants all over North Carolina, Puts 50,000+ miles on the car each year driving all over the state. Day starts at 6:00am, and frequently ends after a dinner meeting with clients late in the evening.
Professional #4 - Does software support for IBM. Clients all over the world. Frequent teleconferences with clients in Japan, Australia, India, etc., as well as many clients in the US. Some of those calls are very early or very late to account for time differences. Is on call 24 hours per day, and is frequently paged in the middle of the night. Oh, and is only paid for 32 hours per week, even though he normally works 50-60.
Professional #5 - Physician. Owns his own practice, managing several other professionals, and is also on the staff of the Carolina Hurricanes. Frequently has office hours all day long, and must attend hocky practices and games to treat players. Frequently travels with the team to away games.
By the way, all these professionals live near me, and all are top notch in their respective fields, and all are successful. I could list dozens of others with similarly hectic schedules. Perhaps you just move at a much slower pace down in Fuquay?
That professional that is taking a 12 hour trip to LA gets his plane, hotel and expenses covered, right?
Irrelevant. This discussion is about time. All professionals go into their respective fields with a full understanding of salaries and potential for raises. I'll be the first to admit that teachers deserve to be paid more - a lot more. But again, that topic is irrelevant to this discussion.
You can claim that the
Mon, 08/29/2011 - 23:20 — danofncYou can claim that the salary/expense accounts are irrelevent, but that doesn't make it true. Someone making $100k or more will put up with a lot more stress than someone making $45k.
If Professional #1 is really working as much as you claim, she should switch jobs unless she's making a ton of money. It can't be healthy.
Professional #2 must get a week off every month, since all work is onsite and he only travels 3 out of 4 weeks. Not a bad gig, since he's probably making good money.
I'm not going through all of them....but you get the point.
You can claim that the
Tue, 08/30/2011 - 00:03 — jeffrey1You can claim that the salary/expense accounts are irrelevent, but that doesn't make it true. Someone making $100k or more will put up with a lot more stress than someone making $45k.
Or you could say that someone getting 13 weeks off (summer break, trackout break, holidays) will put up with a lot more stress than someone with 2 weeks off. Every job has its tradeoffs.
If Professional #1 is really working as much as you claim, she should switch jobs unless she's making a ton of money. It can't be healthy.
Ah, yes, take the soul provider of the family, with 15 years invested in the company, and just ask her to find a new job paying the same amount in this economy. Why didn't she think of that? Newsflash: Corporations are downsizing everywhere. Workers (as in the case of this woman) are being asked to assume the responsibilities of others as companies watch the bottom line. This is very common, and most professionals will share a similar story.
Professional #2 must get a week off every month, since all work is onsite and he only travels 3 out of 4 weeks. Not a bad gig, since he's probably making good money.
Professional #2 is an architect, and rest assured, he's back in the office on that rare week when he's at home. BTW, his wife also travels about one week a month, and Grandma is occasionaly called upon to watch middle schooler while both are away.
Look you can continue to believe that many professionals make tons of money while enjoying a carefree work environment, or you can acknowledge what professionals all around you are are doing to maintain their jobs.
You assume the bare minimum
Tue, 08/30/2011 - 08:59 — danofncYou assume the bare minimum workday. You assume the maximum amount of time off.
Even though neither number can possibly be accurate.
You act like teachers are only working when there are students in front of them, even though they have to be there before the bells ring and stay after the bells ring.
Then, at the same time, you expect me to believe that all of your professional friends are 100% nose-to-the-grindstone for a minimum of 10-12 hours a day, every day, with barely any time to breathe. You actually tried to act like traveling with the Carolina Hurricanes is a hassle, and not a pretty cool way to make a living. I also bet that Eric Staal's dad doesn't think that he's just as effective a doctor as your friend, so he probably doesn't try to tell your friend how to do his job.
We could debate this forever
Tue, 08/30/2011 - 21:57 — jeffrey1We could debate this forever and never agree.
We disagree on whether or not teachers should be able to work one additional hour per week. Your opinion is that teachers are already so overworked, that there is no additional room in their schedule for an extra hour of work, and that the only way to schedule that hour of work is to send ALL students home one hour early, one day per week. Your opinion is that any hardships encountered by parents by sending students home early one day per week is either negligible, or is a small price to pay for 36 seconds of additional attention per student.
My opinion is that, while teachers do work hard, and do work outside the classroom, their work schedule is no more difficult than the millions of professional workers who don't have the luxury of shortening the work day by trading one of their work responsibilities (i.e. teaching) for another of their work responsibilities (i.e. PLCs). Furthermore, the act of sending students home early does cause a hardship (in the form of both additional financial and time committments), and the benefit to the handful of students who are aided by PLCs is not not commensurate with the disruption to as man as 140,000+ students and their familes.
I admit that my opinion is most likely influenced by the years of willful neglect of families by previous Boards of Education. Those BOEs ran roughshod over families, as evidenced by constant reassignments, forcing siblings to attend different schools, MYR, and yes, Wacky Wednesdays.
You actually tried to act like traveling with the Carolina Hurricanes is a hassle, and not a pretty cool way to make a living.
Uh, you do realize this is his 2nd job. It's what he does after putting in a 10-12 hour workday.
Can't have it both ways
Wed, 08/31/2011 - 09:32 — EBDarcyI guess we will never know how many kids could have benefitted from a dedicated hour of time each week for teachers to meet and collaborate. I sure it was more than handful as you claim and if it were your child you would no doubt view this differently.
If PLC's are a way to improve the performance of students who are struggling then that seems like a worthwhile endeavor that may well pay off down the road with fewer students falling behind, more students on grade level and ultimately higher graduation rates. I think most parents would be willing to put up with a little inconvenience if they felt there would be a long-term benefit.
So...
Wed, 08/31/2011 - 10:13 — Bob_SconceJeffrey1's point here, I think, is that there's nothing stopping teachers from having that one hour. They just have to start that hour at 3:45 on Wednesdays instead of 2:45.
"if they felt there would be a long-term benefit" -- that's the issue, isn't it? PLCs were sprung on, not sold to, parents.
agree
Wed, 08/31/2011 - 13:13 — EBDarcyI don't think anyone, even the staunchest supporter of PLC's, would disagree that this could have been handled far better than it was. It was the introduction of this concept that was a failure. But by hurrying it out there they lost all the time they could have spent educating parents. Instead those who opposed the old board latched on to it and were successful in dominating the public dialogue about it. They started calling it Wacky Wednesday, and portrayed it as some weird experiment on WCPSS's part. Which is of course crazy since many other districts do this sort of thing.
not only "many" districts
Wed, 08/31/2011 - 13:20 — AngelaWnot only "many" districts but THIS one too....PLT's were going on at schools LOOONG before Wacky Wednesdays. just the same way they are going on now.
Um....
Tue, 08/30/2011 - 22:39 — Bob_SconceThis argument is about whether teachers should be asked to put in an extra hour to have PLTs after school lets out?
Don't I recall that an extra 10 minutes was added to the beginning of every day to make up for the missed school time? If so, it seems to me that you're not asking teachers to put in any extra time; you're just putting all that time together instead of adding it in thin slices to the beginning of every day.
Good Point.
Thu, 09/01/2011 - 02:57 — jeffrey1Good Point.
Uh, you do realize this is
Tue, 08/30/2011 - 22:38 — danofncUh, you do realize this is his 2nd job. It's what he does after putting in a 10-12 hour workday.
See, this is where you lose
Tue, 08/30/2011 - 23:50 — jeffrey1See, this is where you lose me. It's also where I start to question everything else you say. If his practice is the one I think it is, I know for an absolute fact that they don't do the Hurricanes' physicals after working full days....it is a part of their day. Maybe 2.
Look, I believe that the time that I have given over the past 10 years to student assignment issues and BOE issues should earn me a little bit of respect. I get it that you don't seem to think so. And if you are really starting to question everything I say, then perhaps I am wasting my time by responding to you.
With regards to this case, the doctor in question OWNS the practice. He is responsible for making sure that bills are paid, that the staff is scheduled and paid. He's responsible for making sure that the data systems are up and running. He meets with accountants and lawyers, and all the other stuff that needs to take place when you are a BUSINESS OWNER. I am a business owner myself, and I can assure you the overhead associated with being a business owner can add HOURS to each and every day.
Also, the doctor in question is one of the Hurricanes team physicians. THere are several physicians associated with the Hurricanes. He is responsible for being at ALL Hurricanes practices and home games. He does not go on every away trip -- perhaps a few per year. When the Canes are in the playoffs, he pretty much lives with the team. When the Canes took a preseason trip to Sweden a few years back, he was required to go. Glamorous, you might say. Except for the fact that all he really would like to do is spend some time with his family.
Oh, and the doctor is definitely accepting new patients. My daughter was one of them just a few months ago.
You've already established that time in front of students is all that counts for teachers
That's not true. Of course teachers spend time outside their classrooms. Sometimes a lot of time. And of course that counts. Teaching is an honorable profession, teaching is hard work, and teachers deserve to be paid better. I would pay higher taxes to see that teachers are paid better.
But you have to acknowledge that the school day is 6 hours long. You have to acknowledge that teachers in MS and HS teach, on average, about 4.5 hours per day. You have to acknowledge that school is in session 180 days per year. These are facts that you cannot deny.
We can argue all day about which job causes more stress, or which job requires more email communication outside of work. But you cannot deny that on average, a professional spends more time in the office per year, than teachers spend at school per year. It's simple math.
More importantly, you haven't been able to give me any reason why teachers deserve an extra benefit (early dismissal of students) that has no comparable benefit in private business. What if all grocery stores shut down between 2:00 and 3:00pm everyday for inventory? What if all call centers shut down every day between 2:00 and 3:00pm, so that managers could assess the performance of their customer service representatives? What if all the cab drivers in New York shut down between 2:00 and 3:00pm every day for car maintenance?
You haven't given me anything. On the other hand, I've given you 5 specific examples of professionals who live near me, and the hours they put in. And all you've done is make a mockery of their efforts. One worker should just quit, give up any vesting in her retirement plans, and get a new job making the same amount of money in this sour economy? Another is working a dream job because he gets to attend Hurricanes games at the expense of constantly being away from his family? Are you serious?
The people who own their own
Wed, 08/31/2011 - 21:58 — danofncThe people who own their own business shouldn't really be involved in a comparison with teachers. Teachers certainly don't get to teach as they wish. Haven't you said that you'd have to get more qualifications and then take less money if you wanted to become a teacher?
There are perks to business. Many people have the option to work from home some or all of the time. If they are involved on an important project, there are often bonuses or other special recognitions waiting at the end. There are long lunches when things at the office aren't bustling quite as much.
You're comparing teachers to CEOs and owners, when that isn't accurate.
The county isn't in a position to offer more money. The county isn't in a position to offer much of anything that has a cost.
The lady that I said should quit....is she making a teacher's salary? No...her company pays her an amount that she deems is worth making the sacrifices she makes. With the early-release Wednesdays, the county was making a statement that teachers are an important part of the schools that often is overlooked. In return, some parents whined and complained because it wasn't perfect for them. I know plenty of people who have jobs that they just go to every day because they need the money.....I don't know many teachers that fit that description. That's why you can't really compare teachers to business people. That lady could quit her job tomorrow, find another one, and probably not have to move.....teachers have to either go private or switch districts.
I listened to a presentation about PLT's when the program was first implemented. It was the presentation at my first BAC meeting. I believe it was an important enough program to warrant the special release, because it stresses to teachers just how important the meetings are while at the same time recognizing that they have tons of demands to meet.
Too skinny, Reply at end of
Thu, 09/01/2011 - 02:56 — jeffrey1Too skinny, Reply at end of thread.
Dan aren't you the same guy that
Mon, 08/29/2011 - 19:46 — Voice_of_Reason_Dan aren't you the same guy that criticized military retirements? I was a professional too. I wish I could tell you how many 20 hour work days I've had. How many weeks I pulled alert sitting in what amounted to a cell waiting to run in to a plane on a moment's notice anytime during the day. How many times I got called at 4 AM, pack my bags and report to work. How many times I had to leave my wife and not be able to tell her when I would be back or where I was going. Or the times I had to sit in a cold or extremely hot jet waiting for hours sometimes to take off. And that was just peacetime. Or the times I was in the arctic, the desert, or the mountains getting survival training living off the land. Or my time in a fake POW camp subjected to extreme conditions and intense interrogations from our intelligence services. Or the times a 20 min lunch would have been a luxury. It's really hard to for me to think teachers have it so bad. If it was so bad, I am sure we would have difficulty hiring them.
Of course I am not comparing apples to apples either. And a lot did the same as me working for under $40K. Oh did I forget to tell you that you can't quit if the going got tough and you had enough?
I may have linked to an
Mon, 08/29/2011 - 20:04 — danofncI may have linked to an article that said military pensions were too high. I remember reading one, so it's certainly possible.
I'm resistent to even attempt a response to the rest of your post. If I say something critical, you'll label me as anti-American or anti-military or something.
I think you said you were a pilot, and I'd bet that you made pretty good money as you moved through the ranks. Were the guys making under $40k also pilots? Was this recently? If you're talking about 20 years ago, we'd need to compare their pay to what teachers were making then if we're making an honest comparison.
There are certain things that I think are just part of the deal for military personnel when they sign up, and there are also things that are just part of the deal for teachers. That doesn't mean that I think either group should just have things piled on them without consideration.