By Antonio D. French
Filed Thursday, May 24, 2007 at 10:27 AM
Labels: Beefs, Schools, State_Senate
|
"Best Blogger" — St. Louis Magazine Featured on
"One of the Most SUPPORT PUBDEF.NET Your $7.00 monthly contribution will go a long way to helping us expand the coverage and services you enjoy. GET THE LATEST PUBDEF NEWS 24/7: ABOUT PUB DEF PUB DEF is a non-partisan, independent political blog based in the City of St. Louis, Missouri. Our goal is to cast a critical eye on lawmakers, their policies, and those that have influence upon them, and to educate our readers about legislation and the political processes that affect our daily lives. CONTACT US Do you have a press release, news tip or rumor to share? editor@pubdef.net Tips are always 100% Confidential
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Teachers Union vs. Jeff Smith
|
|
|
27 Comments:
The test is an election?
420 is simply upset that Smith is encroaching onto their turf. They want autonomy not the success of the children. They are also probably worried that some of the teachers wouldn't pass the test. Thus they accuse Smith of being a Republican, as this buzz word is politically divisive and a good attack phrase given the current environment locally and nationally.
He is quite progressive and challenging the merit system!
Pay for performance rewards good teachers and removes the bad. It should be implimented in the SLPS and other City bureaucratic agencies.
5/24/2007 11:32 AM
Those who favor 'pay for performance' are confusing teaching with factory work. Teachers are called to the mission of educating minds; not reproducing identical widgets. Jeff Smith is nothing more than a corporate shill. If a teaching license is only good for five years; then teachers should be paid at five times the present rate. As for encroaching on 'turf'--teaching is not a turf. It's a calling. Those who use this tired diatribe of the 'bad union teachers,' are those who would also deny union representation to other groups. The argument used is..."if you are competent--you will be properly rewarded and thus do not need a union." Tell that to the computer professionals who lost their jobs to overseas competitors able to work for pennies on the dollar. Unions have always been needed as a protection against corporate greed and abuse.
As for the fairness of his proposals--I would add that CHARTER SCHOOLS BE HELD TO THE SAME LEVELS OF ACCOUNTABILITY AS MANDATED BY THE CHARTER SCHOOL LAW IN MO. TO DATE, THESE CHARTERS HAVE NOT BEEN HELD ACCOUNTABLE.
To those who favor a corporate approach; I would offer that they observe the healthcare industry as an example of big business' 'tender mercies.' We have some of the worst healthcare outcomes in the world, yet the most expensive system. I don't see Smith critisizing BJC. If Smith knows so much; let him come to a city classroom, follow the dictates of the state--and be held accountable for a typical classroom. Mr. Duckworth--perhaps you have too much time on your hands--as you constantly blog during the work day. You certainly can critisize, but you don't know what you are talking about.
Finally, any instructor at the college level in government, who can recommend DISENFRANCHISING AN ENTIRE CITY OF VOTERS, in a supposed attempt to 'help the children,' needs to go back to school and study the BILL OF RIGHTS, AND ASSOCIATED READINGS CONCERNING THE ENTIRE IDEA OF DEMOCRACY AND THE SOCIAL CONTRACT. THIS IS NOT MERELY ABOUT REPAIRING SCHOOLS; THIS IS AN OBJECT LESSON IN DEMOCRACY AND IN LIFE. IF WE ALLOW OUR RIGHTS TO BE TRAMPLED AND OUR VOTES STOLEN; WE HAVE SET A POOR EXAMPLE FOR THE CHILDREN. THE CHILDREN NEED TO UNDERSTAND THAT IN LIFE SOME THINGS ARE SACRED--AMONG THEM OUR GOD GIVEN RIGHTS TO A DEMOCRACY AND TO HAVE OUR VOTES COUNTED EQUALLY. FASCISM DOES NOT ELEVATE READING LEVELS OR CONSCIENCES. SMITH AND HIS COHORTS WOULD HAVE A HARD TIME UNDERSTANDING THIS--IT WOULD REQUIRE THAT THEY HAVE A CONSCIENCE. YOU DO NOT FIX INEQUITY THROUGH THE FORCE OF MORE INEQUITY. READ THE CONSTITUTION. BETTER YET--GET OUT OF THE WAY--BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO MOW SMITH DOWN. SMITH IS GUILTY OF MALFEASANCE, AS HE BACKED THIS PLAN TO DISENFRANCHISE THE VOTERS. TIME TO RECALL THE LITTLE LISPING TWERP.
JOS N. WHITE
5/24/2007 12:20 PM
Question, Doug--
Do your teachers have any control over whether you show up to take a test having slept the night before, having eaten that morning, or whether you chose to study at all? And if you didn't do any of those things, does the fact you fail the test mean they are not a good teacher? It's fine to test the teachers on knowledge of their subject matter. It is not fine to base their evaluation on outcomes they can't control. I'm not a teacher, by the way, just a concerned parent who is tired of seeing our best teachers leaving the district for the county, where they get treated with respect. I want them here to teach my kids!
5/24/2007 2:08 PM
Wow, Jos, that was pretty much uncalled-for, you INAPPROPRIATELY CAPITALIZING twerp.
What I've never understood is why, say, I high school calculus teacher is OK with being paid the same (all else being equal) as, say, a gym teacher or a kindergarten teacher. Or, for that matter, why good teachers who bust their tails and work wonders are OK with being paid the same (all else being equal) as those who are just biding time. Sooner or later that has to break, right?
5/24/2007 2:12 PM
Here's a question: Should elected officials get paid based on how many bills they get Gov. Blunt to sign into law?
That being said, to be clear, Senator Smith's plan was fully optional. Teachers would not be forced to be paid based on the achievement of their students.
5/24/2007 2:20 PM
All y'all are the same people who said Smith would never get anything done as a legislator because he had no experience and was too "liberal" to reach across the aisle.
I'm not surprised that Smith's Democratic colleagues from the St. Louis area are sore about his success. If I were Rachel Storch, Maida Coleman, Maria Chappelle-Nadal, etc. I'd be jealous of his success too. Perhaps they should take some lessons from his tip book and learn how to get a bill passed.
Say what you want, but the man is an effective legislator who isn't afraid to take on controversial issues.
I'll take a trailblazer who's willing to challenge the status quo over a do-nothing any day of the week.
5/24/2007 2:29 PM
Anon # 5 - That's cute. Not knowing Maida's accomplishments, but knowing Rachel and Maria's this year, both have either gotten funding for vulnerable programs or had amendments pass in committee or on the floor. That is a success too. The difference here is they are servents of the people and not media whores, like Jeff.
5/24/2007 2:46 PM
anon #6- the people putting Jeff Smith's name in the press are the legislators you mention- Maria Chappelle-Nadal and Rachel Storch and their colleagues.
I understand their frustration at not being able to pass legislation or get free media on their own merits, but I think it would be more productive for them to study Smith's legislative session and learn how to get meaningful legislation passed.
5/24/2007 3:13 PM
Below is Smith's record for the year. If you review the record you will notice that everything is stuck in committee and nothing actually ever passed.
http://www.senate.mo.gov/07info/bts_web/sponsoredby.aspx?SessionType=R&legislatorid=210
5/24/2007 3:39 PM
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
5/24/2007 4:22 PM
Anon #8- Nice try there, but if you
scroll down a few posts, you'll find this:
In addition to the funding of construction projects, SB 389 also included several other provisions, including State Sen. Jeff Smith's "Teach for Missouri Act".
Modeled after the national Teach for America program, Smith's plan (renamed "Missouri Teaching Fellows Program Fund") would allow certain graduates of Missouri colleges who are hired to teach in unaccredited or partially accredited school districts can have some of their student loans forgiven for each of their first five years teaching.
5/24/2007 6:38 PM
Please refrain from personal attacks.
5/24/2007 7:34 PM
French when did you stop wanting personal attacks on your blogg? Check out yor archives from last July to about March. You could be sued for the comments that you wrote and your school board friends wrote. And you know what it just might happen. No personal attacks. The man who started the personal attacks.
5/24/2007 7:59 PM
What bitter comments. It is no wonder that nothing is getting done. Not one person mentioned the children.
But for the record, I agree with Doug.
Pay for performance gives a baseline salary with option to increase a teachers income for improving test scores which theoretically means the kids are learning better which means the teacher is flexible enough to adopt different learning methodologies.
Do you think sales people get bonuses for the heck of it? No, they get a base (in general) as a starting point, bonuses are added on to incentize them to improve their performance and in turn improve the company. Is that bad?
5/24/2007 8:58 PM
This comment has been removed by the author.
5/24/2007 9:00 PM
I have no problem with testing teachers as proposed by Mr. Smith (I am a teacher and union member) and I think most union members would not have a problem with it either. What he outlined on the video sounded quite reasonable.
I have already explained (tried, at least) why I oppose the incentive-based pay on previous posts so I won't bore you all again with details. Basically I don't mind the idea, but don't think it will work as outlined.
I will repeat this though...If we implement a testing procedure and eliminate those teachers who don't pass (even after the remediation Mr. Smith proposed) is incentive pay necessary afterwards? I guess what I am asking is wouldn't those teachers who remain and are deemed "worthy" ALL be entitled to good pay? The bad ones would be gone, right?
Doug, I respect your knowledge and opinions but I think you are wrong on this one. There are too many variables for the performance-based pay to work in the SLPS.
It goes back to the same (becoming tired) argument of kids are not widgets, etc...that 1st Anon. touched on.
There might be another method that would work but I have to believe in order to be fair the logistics would be a nightmare (therefore unaffordable as well).
Just an opinion.
5/25/2007 1:55 AM
How pathetic that teachers object to having to take a test which would only require a 60% score on to pass! They would only have to get 60% on a test over a subject they are suppose to have some sort of expertise in and they object?
And, why shouldn't the best teachers get the best pay? If you want a higer salary, become a better teacher. As a teacher you are suppose to be a professional. Start acting like one and not some union kool-aid drinker.
No wonder public education is failing our kids!
Hey 420, it's not about you, it's about the kids!
5/25/2007 10:02 AM
Dear Anonymous #3,
The talents required to teach lower grades, or lower functioning students are just as rigorous as those required to teach calculus. For instance, a special education teacher of students with TBI (Traumatic Brain Injury) has to master a knowledge of neurology and various other related sciences in order to effectively assist this type of student. To claim that a particular knowledge base is superior to other types of knowledge only demonstrates your academic biases. Keep in mind--Einstein was considered mentally retarded in Germany by those with similar bigotries as yourself. Using your human 'calculus'--someone like Reagan should have been regarded as intellectually and academically deficient to say a Jimmy Carter. (On this one item, I actually agree--Carter is superior to the brain addled Reagan. I grant you that one). The ability to teach encompasses more that mere transmission of a knowledge base. It requires excellent communication skills, social skills, and the understanding of brain mechanisms which control memory, auditory comprehension, visual comprehension, symbolic interpretation, etc. In truth, teaching is as much an 'art' as it is a 'science.' This claim to teaching using scientifically based and proven methodologies refers back to even the NCLB program which Smith favors. As for a gym teacher or kindergarten teacher being paid the same rate as that 'calculus teacher;' I would contend that it takes a far superior teacher to form the foundation in kindergarten and first grade--than that calculus instructor. Teaching is more than mere transmission of skills. Teaching should include metacognition (learning how to think). By the way, metacognition is not an education term; but a neurological one.
As for Smith; he clearly is a political hack of the worst caliber. He is part of a cabal bent on destroying public education, by reducing it to mere training for specifically limiting skills. This is part and parcel of the ongoing attack by corporate fascists determined to permanently undermine what's left of our democracy. You can refer back to the old adage; 'sticks and stones...'--but IT WILL NOT DETER ME. SMITH WANTED A CLASS WAR--NOW HE WILL GET HIS WISH GRANTED.
JOS N. WHITE
DEFIANT AND DETERMINED
(P.S. Smith REALLY should do something about that lisp--it sounds quite childish.)
5/25/2007 12:29 PM
It is strange to me that people are so vehemently defending a system that is non-functional in its current state. If you look at the test results for the SLPS, you will see that these schools and these teachers are not to be defended. The purpose of public education is to give all citizens an opportunity for an education. An education that would prepare them to function in the society that they are in. That is not the case with the SLPS. The test scores are pretty shocking and if you look at the past few years for a given grade level, many of the scores have dropped. It is INCORRECT to say that these children, because of lead paint, malnourishment, and single parents, are the reason these scores are so low. There are thosands of children in these same circumstances who have excelled. I have also seen teachers who receive excellent training produce entire classrooms of high performing students. The class war exists in the fact that the parents of and communities in which these children live are given a false bill of sale. They are told that it is the work of the evil government that their wonderful schools are closing. They are not privy to the same information as parents in upper middle class communities. If the parents of these children KNEW what kind of instruction their children are SUPPOSED to be getting, they would not stand for the current academic conditions in their schools. If they knew how well their child could do if they were in the classrooms of all excellent teachers, they would be fighting a different battle, I believe. THIS is the class war, here. As a teacher I WELCOME testing standards. There is nothing worse than an ineffective teacher. It means a year of wasted instruction time. These children are on a trajectory that is supported by countless literacy studies. If a child is not at the proficient level in reading by 3rd grade, they will not , statistically speaking, be there by 4th, 5th , 6th etc. The chances of that child ever becoming proficient in reading are very low, which creates a very bleak future for them. Imagine if they have a 2nd grade teacher who has "checked out" for the year. That year missed sets them up for a very difficult future in a system where teachers are not trained to remediate students to lower levels. Imagine going to a doctor 5 DAYS A WEEK 7 hours a day for an ENTIRE YEAR and never getting better. Would you continue to employ that person as your doctor? It is the same with teachers. Their job is too important NOT to require strict standards. It is crucial for these kids' futures. I believe it is a CRIME committed against these children to allow them to be taught by teachers who are opposed to taking proficiency tests. They are victimized so people who are mediocre at their jobs can continue to be employed. I don't know what you people think it means to have a horrible teacher for a year. I applaud Jeff Smith, although I had never heard his views until this week. This profession should no longer be for those people who couldn't think of anything else to do and like to have their summers off. It should be for those teachers who bust their asses every single day, who try year after year to get better at what they do, and know in their hearts that all of these children could learn what is necessary for success if only they as educators can unlock the potential in each of them. There ARE teachers like this in the system, unfortunately the unions are very good at instilling fear in all of the teachers - even the wonderful ones. I ,for one, want to work in a public school with ALL excellent teachers. It is our JOB to be exceptional.
5/25/2007 9:38 PM
What an excellent post!
5/25/2007 10:43 PM
It did not impress me very much.
I taught elemtary reading from 1968-1991. I can honestly say that people like Ashcroft and Bond inspired me to stop teaching.
I know in my heart that I did a better job the first 12 or 14 years than I did the last five. There was one year when my randomly selected students scored an average of 2.7 years above grade levelon the one test they took---the old stanford. 7 my 6th grade class maxed out at 11.5.
During the 80's, dumbed down text books were thrust at us----geared for testing ---eventually Ashcroft seemed to have a lot to do with it-----the good literature which inspires kids to want to read was given short shrift.
All of Smith and the other republicans---oh, I forget-he is a democrat?---find a subtle way of using testing to make scapegoats of teachers----sometimes i think the testing has less to do with assessing children's skills than it has to do with establishing control over teachers.
This incessant testing is often a waste of time; it cannot accomplish what it is supposed to, and it does a lot of damage in stifling creativity and narrowing the boundaries of what can b taught and how it can be taught.
I took a year off in 1991---I have not gone back.
5/26/2007 1:50 AM
I am too senile to spell elementary correctly---you might as well ignore the entire post! or not.
5/26/2007 1:54 AM
Come on guys this is a blog so what if a few words are spelled icorrectly.
5/27/2007 12:40 AM
In a district filled with students that change schools mid-year, sometimes more than once, how can you expect the same results as a child who goes to the same school k-6? how can you hold a teacher accountable for students who haven't been in their classroom all year? as for teacher testing, why waste the time and money? why not use it for professional development, lower class sizes, field trips, etc? i would challenge you all to try and ace a test you took twenty years prior. the experience of teaching over time is much more valuable than a test.
5/28/2007 9:49 PM
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
5/28/2007 10:19 PM
Local 420 is operating to represent the teachers. That's what they are SUPPOSED to do. It would be wrong to assume that 420's interests do not have the children in mind, though. I believe most of the teachers in 420 firmly believe that the single most important ingredient in the children's educational success IS their teacher. If one believes that to be true, then what is in the best interests of the teachers DOES serve the interests of the children.
For those who believe otherwise; who believe that curriculum, testing, evaluation of teachers, student test scores, state government, district administration, legislative actions, NCLB or any of a host of other things that have come to be more important in some people's minds than THE TEACHERS, I would ask you to think back to your school days and see what YOU remember having an influence on your life. Was it a certain textbook, or a really well-crafted standardized test? Was is the superintendent of your district or what the federal government rated your school that motivated you to learn? Or was it A TEACHER, OR TWO, OR MORE?
5/29/2007 8:12 PM
Wow, all you Smith haters are really mature.
Glad to know that you're the ones indoctrinating and de-educating our children in the SLPS.
Rather than saying "childish" things, you should probably work on studying for those tests you'll be taking in a few years.
5/30/2007 12:39 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home