To the DISer whose husband was looking for a teaching job

[Telcogirl]

It's because of blanket statements like this....

Originally Posted by Hannathy
I think when you are making $70,000 a year for approx 6 hrs of work every weekend and holiday off and a full 2 months of vacation and you are asked to work an addition 20-40 minutes a day you should be willing to do it. They weren't so now they get to see what the rest of the real world has been dealing with.

IF a teacher works 6 hours (notice the big IF), then it is most likely contractual. Blame the BOE. I don't personally know of a teacher that only works 6 hours (wait, yes I do....we have a .5 FTE teacher in our school. I'm pretty sure she makes less than $70,000 )

BuzzLiteYear - PLEASE do not take Hannathy's comments as a personal attack. I truly believe that Hannathy is commenting on the situation in Rhode Island. And to that end, Hannathy is correct. The average teacher's salary at the high school is between $72K & 78K. That is a good salary regardless of your profession. It is also worth being said, that those salaries are paid on the backs of taxpayers. That alone is going to invoke strong emotion from people.

The super wanted to change the school hours from 7:50 - 2:25 pm to 8am - 3pm. There was the additional 25 minutes a day. Ok, so maybe Hannathy estimated a bit on the low end for what the work day consisted of, but really not by much.

I think this thread has established that pay scales for teachers vary throughout the country. I think this thread has also established that teachers work very hard.

Now, how about some solutions? Are there are teachers out there that have been a part of a successful turnaround in an underpeforming school district?

There are so many serious factors playing into this unfortunate set of circumstances.

 

[daughtersrus]

are you still comparing the kids as employees? unbelievable

I don't think that any of the teachers here are comparing students to employees. If you go back in the thread, you will see that Hannathy is the one that is comparing teaching to other professions. At one point, she used the example that manager are fired if they are are not able to get their employees to perform. I think that point is what was being responded to.

 

[chobie]

I was talken back by some of the following

a from http://www.projo.com/news/content/central_falls_turmoil_02-28-10_TQHGS9N_v292.38b0e26.html
We don’t make excuses [for the low test scores], but we do have to talk about reality,” union president Sessums said to the cheers of the crowd. “Children in poverty come to school with a lot of issues.”

b. A few posts brought up where is the responsibility of the parents?

c. My experience with the IEP team, they like to use "she has disability" to answer all my questions, then when I pulled DD out of resource room to teach her and showed them that I successed, their answers were "Math is easy to teach" Bottom line, none of anything is the teacher's responsibility

May be it is me, but I saw those as execuses, I hope a teacher can see that if a child spends about 1/3 of the time in school, it will be nice to see an adult to take some responsibilities to help the child. As pointed out by bridge a few posts back, it can be done, but it needs strong leadership and dedicated staff.

Now writing until this point... if I do not have a 11 years old and a 9 years old, I will give it a try.

Are you denying that children that come in poverty come to school with issues? I understand that just writing these kids off because they come from poverty would be wrong, but there is no escaping there are many issues -- and not all can be overcome by teachers staying at the school 24/7.

There are kids who live in cars with the their parents, kids who work at minimum wage jobs to help support their families, kids who live in neighborhoods where it is like a war zone -- but all it takes is teachers giving more time for free and all that will magically go away?

And what about the parents responsibility? Why is that taboo to mention that? You know, in Detroit, parents can be criminally charged with neglect for not getting their kids to school. Do think parents should never be held accountable?

 

[paysensmom]

Again, I do not envy a teacher's job, but if anyone whines, then at least acknowledge the benefits and if it were so bad, then get another job. [/I]

Where are the whining teachers on this thread? I have not read teachers whining about what they get or don't get. I have read teachers stating facts about their day to enlighten the ignorance shown about what a teacher's job entails. I am pretty sure that all of the teachers on here love what they do and do not need anyone telling them to get another job. We are happy with what we do. We are unhappy with the ignorant people who think they know all about being a teacher. I know it has been mentioned before; if anyone thinks teachers have it easy, then go to school and become a teacher. We could always use more good teachers

 

[TheDisneyGirl02]

c. My experience with the IEP team, they like to use "she has disability" to answer all my questions, then when I pulled DD out of resource room to teach her and showed them that I successed, their answers were "Math is easy to teach" Bottom line, none of anything is the teacher's responsibility

May be it is me, but I saw those as execuses, I hope a teacher can see that if a child spends about 1/3 of the time in school, it will be nice to see an adult to take some responsibilities to help the child. As pointed out by bridge a few posts back, it can be done, but it needs strong leadership and dedicated staff.

Now writing until this point... if I do not have a 11 years old and a 9 years old, I will give it a try.

That is ashame that you had a bad experience with an IEP team, but please don't think that all teachers are like that. My sister was home sick last week but continued to email a parent about her child so they could brainstorm together a way to help her child. Not every teacher will do that, they are all different and it's not right to lump them all together.

That would be like me saying that ALL Pep Boys are bad because the one that currently has my husband's car isn't working on it. I don't blame every Pep Boys for the stupidity of one location. But it seems that the word 'teacher' is used as a blanket statement whenever something goes wrong.

 

[averysmom]

Here is the list of the 6 points of transformation as listed on yesterday's local state paper (The Providence Journal):

"Six conditions Central Falls High School teachers were told they must agree to in order to keep their jobs:

Increase length of school day by 25 minutes to provide more instructional time for students.

Formalize tutoring schedule so struggling students have extra help for one hour before and after school.
Agree to eat lunch with students one day a week to build stronger relationships.

Attend two weeks of professional development in the summer at a rate of $30 an hour ($1,800 per year).

Stay after school for 90 minutes one day each week to work with fellow teachers analyzing student work and test data and discussing ways to improve teaching at a rate of $30 an hour.

Accept more rigorous evaluations by a third party starting March 1. "


I am not sure where you get 9 1/2 extra hours a week. From my interpretation of the requirements, the only daily increase is the 25 minutes per school day. All of the other points are looking to establish a weekly schedule. It does not appear that the teachers would have to spend their lunch breaks EVERY day. Nor would they have to spend extra time tutoring every day. Does it sound like there will be some extra work for no extra pay? Yes, it does. The reality of that concept is that most of us have or have had the same thing happen in our careers and professions at some time or another as well.


I am not posting this to stir anything up, I am just posting this to outline the facts as it pertains to this particular school district and these particular teachers. From reading through this discussion, it is apparent that the teaching profession is not uniform throughout the country as it pertains to salaries.

I think it's important to note that this serious issue is a result of the federally funded school improvement grants, which are endorsed by the Obama administration.

This grant program pushes for one of four approaches:
School closures
Being taken over by a charter school
Transformation (which is what they were trying to go for in Central Falls)
And finally, turnover which removes the entire staff, with no more than half rehired. (which is what is now happening)

This will certainly be a precedant setting situation for sure.

25x5 = 2 hours 5 minutes/week (unpaid)
1 lunch = 30 minutes/week (unpaid)
90 minutes after school for colaboration time = 90 minutes/week (paid)
1 hr before and after school for tutoring students = up to 10 hours/week (unpaid)

So the way I see it, they are looking at a minimum of another 4 hours of their work week up to 14 hours - the majority (80%) of it unpaid. I think where the 9 1/2 hours was coming in, was the pp was averaging the tutoring at 5 hours.

Personally, I don't think there is one person on this board that would be happy to add another 4-14 hours to their work week, unpaid. Period.

 

[andrews_dad]

I have been teaching for 26 years and I make just over half of what you quote...26 years, a Specialist Certification, and I will never in my life make $70,000 a year. I work a minimum of 8 hours a day...plus meetings, trainings, and the required graduate courses which I pay for out of my pocket so I can keep my certification current.

No teacher gets two months of vacation. We have unpaid time off. Funny how when you talk about anyone other than teachers, that is furlough time, not vacation.

In addition, no district I've ever worked in has offered maternity leave or other perks that most professionals enjoy.

Angry and uninformed. Not a nice combination. My best advice is that if you have never taught in a failing school system...failing for whatever reason...don't judge the teachers there.

This person hits the nail on the head. All correct. Not too many folks talk about how nice it is that construction workers get two months off per year in teh dead of winter. But teachers get told "that must be nice" to have summers off ... unpaid.

Most districts in my area give women who have just given birth one full school year off. You are not paid at that time, of course. But you will have a job when you come back after one year (not always the same job, but a job).

 

[fac]

It's because of blanket statements like this....

Originally Posted by Hannathy
I think when you are making $70,000 a year for approx 6 hrs of work every weekend and holiday off and a full 2 months of vacation and you are asked to work an addition 20-40 minutes a day you should be willing to do it. They weren't so now they get to see what the rest of the real world has been dealing with.

IF a teacher works 6 hours (notice the big IF), then it is most likely contractual. Blame the BOE. I don't personally know of a teacher that only works 6 hours (wait, yes I do....we have a .5 FTE teacher in our school. I'm pretty sure she makes less than $70,000 )

I was referring to the following by you

How about this....if you make more than $50,000/yr you have to give up lunch once a week? If you make more than $80,000/yr you have to give up two? If you make over $100,000/yr you have to give up them all?

why the discussion on giving up lunch?

 

[TheDisneyGirl02]

This person hits the nail on the head. All correct. Not too many folks talk about how nice it is that construction workers get two months off per year in teh dead of winter. But teachers get told "that must be nice" to have summers off ... unpaid.

Never thought about that point. Are they able to collect unemployment during that time period?

 

[HsvTeacher]

Never thought about that point. Are they able to collect unemployment during that time period?

In Alabama, you can't collect unemployment, because it's an unpaid leave of absence. You also don't get benefits, such as medical insurance. You have to either buy private insurance or purchase COBRA.

 

[fac]

That is ashame that you had a bad experience with an IEP team, but please don't think that all teachers are like that. My sister was home sick last week but continued to email a parent about her child so they could brainstorm together a way to help her child. Not every teacher will do that, they are all different and it's not right to lump them all together.

That would be like me saying that ALL Pep Boys are bad because the one that currently has my husband's car isn't working on it. I don't blame every Pep Boys for the stupidity of one location. But it seems that the word 'teacher' is used as a blanket statement whenever something goes wrong.

I do not disagree there are good teachers, in fact, DD's current teacher is one. She always called me back giving me her home number to call. I told her I would not be calling her home and made sure I talked to her during her afterschool hour as I have to respect her home life. Obviously, she is the extreme. Then there are teachers who do a good job even not going over and beyond. I do think they "earned" their salary.

I can say that during my first confernece with the teachers, some just criticized DD without taking her background into consideration, they have a predecided notion of the kids, but when I pointed out what they may have overlooked, I did see the teachers took an objective look and have changed their views.

But then there are the lousy teachers, it hurts even to think about them. I seldom engaged in this type of discussion, but this really hits home. I hope there is a system to weed out the bad teachers as they impact a kid's future. But I also know it is very difficult.

 

[fac]

To echo TheDisneyGirl02's post earlier, I like to see the teachers' view on how to address the RI's problem...

I personally think we cannot do it without extra time...
even the RIFT rep said it was not about time and money, but the right to negotiate time and money...

(Again, in my IEP meeting, I told the teachers, I just can't see how the learning gap be closed if the kids were not taught more and expected to do more.)

 

[Telcogirl]

1 hr before and after school for tutoring students = up to 10 hours/week (unpaid).

The one hour before and after for tutoring was actually to be a rotating schedule, not everyday. That would seem to be possibly two hours a week, max?

Personally, I don't think there is one person on this board that would be happy to add another 4-14 hours to their work week, unpaid. Period.

Happy about it? Absolutely not; I agree with you 100%. However, the Super was looking for grant money to compensate these teachers for some of their extra time at a rate of $30 an hour.

Let's not forget, that it is now a federal mandate for all states to identify the bottom 5% of schools and to follow the guidelines to fix them.

Listen, in this economy, many people have made sacrifices much greater than working an extra 4 hours a week for no extra money.

It is worth mentioning that the teachers were offered a $30 an hour rate for the two-week training sessions they were going to be required to attend during the summer months. They wanted $90 an hour. That's right; $90 an hour (in one of states poorest cities) to attend training.

 

[Amy8888]

1 hr before and after school for tutoring students = up to 10 hours/week (unpaid)

So the way I see it, they are looking at a minimum of another 4 hours of their work week up to 14 hours - the majority (80%) of it unpaid. I think where the 9 1/2 hours was coming in, was the pp was averaging the tutoring at 5 hours.

Personally, I don't think there is one person on this board that would be happy to add another 4-14 hours to their work week, unpaid. Period.

I don't think adding the extra hour of tutoring means every teacher will be forced to stay every day, so I'm thinking it's definitely more toward the 4 hour end of things.

And you are right, there is not one person probably anywhere that would be happy to add 4-14 hours to their workweek unpaid. However, that is happening all across America right now. In fact, people are asked to work more while getting paid less. And even before the recession, this was the case for any salaried worker. When needed by an organization, a salaried employee is expected to work extra hours just to get the job done. Weekends, nights, travel, all "unpaid." And please do not assume that these salaried workers are getting paid more than teachers. I know in my case it certainly isn't true (and yes, I have advanced education).

I know there are teachers who work very very hard, some who even use their own money to buy school supplies for their students. I have also even heard of local school districts where teachers VOLUNTARILY started giving up their "alone time" lunch hours to sit with their students. That is a model to follow (and from what I understand, this move really helped a lot of issues in the school, such as discipline).

But I also hear that teachers are the unsung heroes, that they're in it for the children. I am sure this is true much of the time. So I don't want to pick on teachers, but I do have this to say: The NEA needs to go. It seems to do far more harm than good when it comes to doing what is right for our children. And please don't try to tell me that without it, teachers would be taken advantage of. They are educated, outspoken individuals who in my experience, don't take BS.

 

[chobie]

I don't think adding the extra hour of tutoring means every teacher will be forced to stay every day, so I'm thinking it's definitely more toward the 4 hour end of things.

And you are right, there is not one person probably anywhere that would be happy to add 4-14 hours to their workweek unpaid. However, that is happening all across America right now. In fact, people are asked to work more while getting paid less. And even before the recession, this was the case for any salaried worker. When needed by an organization, a salaried employee is expected to work extra hours just to get the job done. Weekends, nights, travel, all "unpaid." And please do not assume that these salaried workers are getting paid more than teachers. I know in my case it certainly isn't true (and yes, I have advanced education).

I know there are teachers who work very very hard, some who even use their own money to buy school supplies for their students. I have also even heard of local school districts where teachers VOLUNTARILY started giving up their "alone time" lunch hours to sit with their students. That is a model to follow (and from what I understand, this move really helped a lot of issues in the school, such as discipline).

But I also hear that teachers are the unsung heroes, that they're in it for the children. I am sure this is true much of the time. So I don't want to pick on teachers, but I do have this to say: The NEA needs to go. It seems to do far more harm than good when it comes to doing what is right for our children. And please don't try to tell me that without it, teachers would be taken advantage of. They are educated, outspoken individuals who in my experience, don't take BS.

Yes, the teachers would be taken advantage of without a union. You expect the teachers to take on more hours and more work and now you also want them to do away with their union. So, then the teachers would have to spend even more hours trying to negotiate salaries, benefits, hours etc.

Everyone keeps saying the teachers' union does not work for kids -- it doesn't. It works for the teachers so the teachers can work for the kids.

You are right about one thing, teachers are educated and outspoken and that is why you won't see them doing away with the union anytime soon.

 

[Amy8888]

Yes, the teachers would be taken advantage of without a union. You expect the teachers to take on more hours and more work and now you also want them to do away with their union. So, then the teachers would have to spend even more hours trying to negotiate salaries, benefits, hours etc.

Everyone keeps saying the teachers' union does not work for kids -- it doesn't. It works for the teachers so the teachers can work for the kids.

You are right about one thing, teachers are educated and outspoken and that is why you won't see them doing away with the union anytime soon.

But that's what I don't get. Why is it so darn effortful for teachers, but no other kind of professional, to negotiate salaries, benefits, and hours (often with the caveat that you would be expected to work additional hours when necessary)? You basically have a job interview, get offered the job, are told your salary and benefits, and the expectations associated with accepting the job offer. Then, you have the right as a prospective employee to decide to accept the offer or whether you should ask for more. Then you are done.

This happens all across the country every day in just about every profession. I don't see why teachers need a union to do it all for them.

It seems to me that the NEA is turning teachers over to an hourly wage mentality, which is not the sort of thing you would expect to see in a true profession.

 

[chobie]

But that's what I don't get. Why is it so darn effortful for teachers, but no other kind of professional, to negotiate salaries, benefits, and hours (often with the caveat that you would be expected to work additional hours when necessary)? You basically have a job interview, get offered the job, are told your salary and benefits, and the expectations associated with accepting the job offer. Then, you have the right as a prospective employee to decide to accept the offer or whether you should ask for more. Then you are done.

This happens all across the country every day in just about every profession. I don't see why teachers need a union to do it all for them.

It seems to me that the NEA is turning teachers over to an hourly wage mentality, which is not the sort of thing you would expect to see in a true profession.

To paraphrase MrsPete: the union also protects teachers from false allegations, protects teachers from getting fired because they dared to give a school board member's child a detention (or a friend of a school board member) and provides them with a sense of stability in their pay and benefits.

Yes, other professions can have their pay sliced, be fired for no reason, have their benefits taken without any say other than to quit their job, but no one likes living that way.

It seems to me people are just plain jealous that the teachers have a modicum of job stability that other people don't have. Rather than wanting to take that away from teachers, people should try to get that in their own profession.

 

[Amy8888]

To paraphrase MrsPete: the union also protects teachers from false allegations, protects teachers from getting fired because they dared to give a school board member's child a detention (or a friend of a school board member) and provides them with a sense of stability in their pay and benefits.

Yes, other professions can have their pay sliced, be fired for no reason, have their benefits taken without any say other than to quit their job, but no one likes living that way.

It seems to me people are just plain jealous that the teachers have a modicum of job stability that other people don't have. Rather than wanting to take that away from teachers, people should try to get that in their own profession.

No, not jealous here. I feel pretty good about my job security without a union. But I also know that if my boss gave me a reasonable deadline for an important report, and I failed to meet that deadline, there could be consequences and I would have to accept them. Because I don't like thinking about the consequences, I do sometimes work nights and weekends to make sure I reach deadlines. I don't go around complaining about it either, because heck, I know more and more unemployed people and what some of them wouldn't give for a steady income right now.

But the issue at hand, it seems, is whether or not it was fair that these teachers were fired. To me, it does seem fair under the circumstances. The teachers were given a set of conditions, were told what they had to do to keep their jobs, and they chose not to do that. So they were fired WITH warning, despite (because of?) having a union. It really seems that it was the union that led the teachers to believe they had job security when in fact, they didn't. Doesn't sound like the union is working for the teachers or the students, actually.

NCLB is no joke. We're getting to crunch time, and teachers have known it was going to come down to this for years. Perhaps the union in this case should have been paying more attention to this legislation. Perhaps the teachers would not have acted so stubbornly if they acted as individuals, rather than as a unionized group. Perhaps the teachers, if not prodded by the union, would have seen that eating lunch with students might not be the worst thing in the world...it might even bring a new sense of community to the school and have many positive outcomes.

 

[daughtersrus]

The one hour before and after for tutoring was actually to be a rotating schedule, not everyday. That would seem to be possibly two hours a week, max?





Happy about it? Absolutely not; I agree with you 100%. However, the Super was looking for grant money to compensate these teachers for some of their extra time at a rate of $30 an hour.

Let's not forget, that it is now a federal mandate for all states to identify the bottom 5% of schools and to follow the guidelines to fix them.

Listen, in this economy, many people have made sacrifices much greater than working an extra 4 hours a week for no extra money.

It is worth mentioning that the teachers were offered a $30 an hour rate for the two-week training sessions they were going to be required to attend during the summer months. They wanted $90 an hour. That's right; $90 an hour (in one of states poorest cities) to attend training.

Gallo did say that she would try to get grant money to cover the extra hours but as it stood, she was only willing to pay them for the two weeks in the summer.

Could you explain where you got 4 hours a week from?

As for the $90/hour figure, let's remember that the district agreed to this amount when they negotiated the contract. I'm not saying that it's an appropriate amount, I'm just pointing out that the union didn't pull the figure out of thin air.

From the contract...

However, for professional services provided outside of the agreed upon school year that would normally be considered part of a bargaining unit member’s regular responsibilities, such as summer ET, and IEP teams, ESY programs, guidance counselors, etc., the individual will be compensated based upon his or her prorated per diem salary.

It shall be the responsibility of the teacher to submit pay vouchers to the building principal on a bi-weekly basis.
The District shall not be prohibited from paying stipends for specific tasks related to grants and committee work. In such instances the District shall provide the Union with information on said stipends and the circumstances under which they are being offered.

 

[daughtersrus]

But that's what I don't get. Why is it so darn effortful for teachers, but no other kind of professional, to negotiate salaries, benefits, and hours (often with the caveat that you would be expected to work additional hours when necessary)? You basically have a job interview, get offered the job, are told your salary and benefits, and the expectations associated with accepting the job offer. Then, you have the right as a prospective employee to decide to accept the offer or whether you should ask for more. Then you are done.

This happens all across the country every day in just about every profession. I don't see why teachers need a union to do it all for them.

It seems to me that the NEA is turning teachers over to an hourly wage mentality, which is not the sort of thing you would expect to see in a true profession.

How about police officers, firefighters, nurses...? These are all professionals that have union representation.