US school: *all* teachers fired!

Rebelheart

An Irishwoman listening to Pat Kenny from America this morning emailed him with this story, and sure enough a school in Rhode Island has just fired all 74 of its teachers because:

1) they were apparently "underperforming"

2) they refused to work extra hours unpaid to raise the "performance" level of the school


http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/02/24/rhode.island.teachers/index.html

http://abcnews.go.com/WN/rhode-island-school-fires-74-teachers/story?id=9911693

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,587334,00.html?mep


I'm in between two minds on this, because usually a school in a poor area gets the most deprived students whose parents are least interested in their studies and consequently it ends up being an "underperforming" school. On the other hand, the state has to keep high targets but 96% of this school's students are entitled to free lunch/deprived so in such an area teachers should definitely be paid extra because it is a much tougher job to get results in that environment. This extra payment was not being offered to the teachers so they refused to do the extra time and were sacked.


Is this "solution" in Rhode Island right or wrong?

FunkZ

They should work for free anyways... they should...

The Providence paper reports that the average base salary of the teachers is $72,000 to $78,000, not counting benefits. The median income for a household in the town of Central Falls is $22,628.

Taken from another forum.
The union wanted to go to $90 per hour.

They were already well paid and still failing.

kowloon

So will the school perform better without teachers?

sbsquarepants

Rebelheart wrote: »

96% of this school's students are entitled to free lunch

There's no such thing as a free lunch:D

KerranJast

If the students regressed or didn't show any academic improvement compared to their skills coming into the school then yes the teachers should have been penalised as they obviously weren't doing their jobs well.

That_Guy

kowloon wrote: »

So will the school perform better without teachers?

You'd learn more from Bear in the big blue house.

Boston

Deleted User wrote: »

Taken from another forum.
The union wanted to go to $90 per hour.

They were already well paid and still failing.

Well paid is relative. Given the majority of the families in the area live on welfare and those that don't mainly more unskilled low end jobs, it's not fair to compare the wages a professional college graduate receives.

General Zod

Deleted User wrote: »

Taken from another forum.
The union wanted to go to $90 per hour.

They were already well paid and still failing.

so teachers in schools in poor areas should be paid less than teachers in schools in richer areas?

KerranJast

General Zod wrote: »

so teachers in schools in poor areas should be paid less than teachers in schools in richer areas?

I think that poster was making the point that the teachers union wanted a pay increase for their members despite their members performing badly at their jobs. Teachers pay should be performance related just like every other profession and be linked to the level of the students you teach. If you go to a disadvantaged school and manage to improve their education by a big relative amount you should be well rewarded.

Boston

KerranJast wrote: »

I think that poster was making the point that the teachers union wanted a pay increase for their members despite their members performing badly at their jobs. Teachers pay should be performance related just like every other profession and be linked to the level of the students you teach. If you go to a disadvantaged school and manage to improve their education by a big relative amount you should be well rewarded.

How do you know it's a pay increase? Perhaps $90 an hour is the standard rate for overtime.

BluePlanet

Deleted User wrote: »

Taken from another forum.
The union wanted to go to $90 per hour.

They were already well paid and still failing.

In a proposal based on federal guidelines, Gallo asked teachers to work a longer school day of seven hours and tutor students weekly for one hour outside school time.

She proposed teachers have lunch with students often, meet for 90 minutes every week to discuss education and set aside two weeks during summer break for paid professional development.

A spokesman for the union said the teachers had accepted most of the changes, but wanted to work out compensation for the extra hours of work.
The superintendent said the two sides could not agree on a pay rate

http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/02/24/rhode.island.teachers/index.html

In fairness they are asking a lot of those teachers and it sounds like they were willing to take on the extra load. But they deserve to be compensated for it.

Rebelheart

BluePlanet wrote: »

In fairness they are asking a lot of those teachers and it sounds like they were willing to take on the extra load. But they deserve to be compensated for it.

That's the way I'm reading it too. It is fairly easy for a teacher in an elite private school with half the number of students in each class to "perform", especially given that Mammy and Daddy most likely had enough brains to earn enough money to send them to these schools. It's really apples and oranges comparing both and teachers in deprived areas should by right be better rewarded.

BluePlanet

The article says that 85% of the students are Hispanic and speak English as a second language. Also they state the students and their families are rather transient.

Cookie_Monster

BluePlanet wrote: »

In fairness they are asking a lot of those teachers and it sounds like they were willing to take on the extra load. But they deserve to be compensated for it.

I would consider the 72k of wages (pretty high by US standards) to be more than fair compensation here. heaven forbid, a whole 7 hours a day work, if only

Rebelheart

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

I would consider the 72k of wages (pretty high by US standards) to be more than fair compensation here. heaven forbid, a whole 7 hours a day work, if only

Seven hours teaching is a vastly different thing to a seven hour work day. Even for a teacher who has been teaching for decades and does not need to spend time on lesson plans s/he must set and correct assignments for all her/his classes. For a younger teacher you could add a further five hours to that seven.

BluePlanet

since Cookie Monster feels the teachers have it so good.
What's preventing him from joining their ranks?

sbsquarepants

I'm not a teacher myself or anything, but i do know a couple and they don't work anything approaching 12 hour days! More like 12 hours every 2 days, if even that.

BluePlanet

sbsquarepants wrote: »

I'm not a teacher myself or anything, but i do know a couple and they don't work anything approaching 12 hour days! More like 12 hours every 2 days, if even that.

6 hours a day huh?
Doesn't sound like you know them very well.

sbsquarepants

I know 1 quite well, other is more of an acquaintance! 6 hours is accurate bar exceptional circumstances. I'm not saying teaching is an easy job, i couldn't do it. But it certainly isn't a 12 hours a day job. It's more stressfull and patience trying i would imagine, than time consuming

Boston

sbsquarepants wrote: »

I know 1 quite well, other is more of an acquaintance! 6 hours is accurate bar exceptional circumstances. I'm not saying teaching is an easy job, i couldn't do it. But it certainly isn't a 12 hours a day job. It's more stressfull and patience trying i would imagine, than time consuming

Considering the national max is what 38 hours? Few people work 5x12 hour shifts. So what exactly is your point.

sbsquarepants

Rebelheart wrote: »

Seven hours teaching is a vastly different thing to a seven hour work day.. For a younger teacher you could add a further five hours to that seven.

Thats my point

Boston

Yea, thats unpaid prep work which an experience teacher doesn't have to do.

sbsquarepants

I assume you're a teacher?
I didn't mean any offence, was just stating my belief that very few if any teachers put in 12 hour days.
No more, no less

Boston

What a ridiculous assumption. Seems in keeping with your prior posts.

sbsquarepants

Hardly ridiculous now. Plus, prior posts weren't assumptions, they were opinions.
I was trying to be polite to you, i wont bother again.
Now go to the back of the class!

Naos

I'm very tempted to text a few teachers I know to see if any of them put in 12 hours a day.

sbsquarepants

Naos wrote: »

I'm very tempted to text a few teachers I know to see if any of them put in 12 hours a day.

Save your 9c, they don't!

Dionysus

Naos wrote: »

I'm very tempted to text a few teachers I know to see if any of them put in 12 hours a day.

Well, I'm only a trainee teacher. I have my first class at 8.45am and finish at 1pm. I usually teach, at least, 2.15 mins (3 classes) of those 4.15 mins. After 1pm I go into college and attend lectures. Then I go home and write up my reflections on each of the days classes and then write lesson plans for the next day's classes. The latter takes ages as I have to read a load of theory stuff - e.g. how to teach mixed ability classes, class management strategies, etc - in order to write good plans, which go towards a huge percentage of the final result. Then, I try and read a bit for my college assignments project. There is definitely a huge difference in teaching in a fee-paying school and in a school in a disadvantaged area, both of which I've done. I'm in the former now but I can see it is wrong that a fully qualified teacher in my school earns just as much as a fully qualified teacher in, say, Ballymun. That's not fair.

Dionysus

Dionysus wrote: »

Well, I'm only a trainee teacher. I have my first class at 8.45am and finish at 1pm. I usually teach, at least, 2.15 mins (3 classes) of those 4.15 mins. After 1pm I go into college and attend lectures. Then I go home and write up my reflections on each of the days classes and then write lesson plans for the next day's classes. The latter takes ages as I have to read a load of theory stuff - e.g. how to teach mixed ability classes, class management strategies, etc - in order to write good plans, which go towards a huge percentage of the final result. Then, I try and read a bit for my college assignments project. There is definitely a huge difference in teaching in a fee-paying school and in a school in a disadvantaged area, both of which I've done. I'm in the former now but I can see it is wrong that a fully qualified teacher in my school earns just as much as a fully qualified teacher in, say, Ballymun. That's not fair.

And for when you land a permanent teaching job

Hank_Jones

sbsquarepants wrote: »

I assume you're a teacher?
I didn't mean any offence, was just stating my belief that very few if any teachers put in 12 hour days.
No more, no less

Boston as a teacher?

Spare a thought for the kids he would be teaching.