Happy to help. :) Just, if a national news story breaks in your neighborhood, please give me the inside scoop okay?
I am afraid a man crashed his airplane into a building about five miles from my work, but all I can offer you is this.
I hope I have not sounded like I am on one side or another.
The compensation you mention contradicts what I have heard. Coming from that perspective, I can better understand your position.
No worries... I just caution you not to infer too much about your local situation with what is happening here.
Being a Navy brat and ex-Army, my 'local' situation is not. Granted, I have never lived in Rhode Island. I have lived in California, Florida, Hawaii, Maryland, Texas and even Guantanamo Bay Cuba. In my limited experience, teachers are underpaid.
When times were better we had frequent pizza parties…
I am not sure my military experience would be comparable. During the dot-com craze, yes, things were roaring. Not so much since, even in good times. I can not help but wonder if that was simply because people completely unqualified for their positions were throwing the pizza parties.
I am certainly not saying one should not work hard or that a job is a right.
Here is a reference that has me off by a few thousand dollars.
You have me here. That seems outrageous to the point of unbelievability.
Here is a reference that has me off by a few thousand dollars. It also has a community comparison. If you need more than this, please ask.
That article is very misleading, it makes it sound like the teachers are only being asked to work 25 more minutes a day when the actual increase in time spent working is considerably more. Also, the median income of the area is not the same as cost of living. It's entirely possible that everyone in that area is just massively poor. To put in perspective the things the district is asking the teachers to do without compensation, imagine if your boss called all the employees up one day and said "Alright, in order to improve productivity we want you all to work 5 hours overtime everyday without any kind of pay at all."
|
I don't know how it works in the US but...
In the UK the presence of a private school near a state school tends to damage the performance of the state school, unless the private school is a super-elite institution full of boarders and with very few locals.
Why?
Wealthy, educated parents (and here those two things are broadly connected) contribute to effective School Boards of Governors. The people who actually have oversight of our schools are usually parents and a few staff, this group can have a huge impact upon a school and motivated, demanding Parent-Governors with an understanding of education and high aspirations for the pupils can contribute a lot.
They provide students with high expectations who model good behaviour, as these students are 'cool' (lets not pretend here, despite very film, song or novel you've encountered in which the cool kids are dirt poor, in school the kids who go skiing, have cool clothes, call home on iphones and eat well are cool - it's called a consumer society). These students can create a positive, work-oriented tone in a classroom that makes the teachers job much, much easier. I'd love to pretend I can teach anyone but that would be a self-aggrandising lie.
They affect the psyche of the school. In schools with a mixed intake students believe that hard-work and a good education can create success, this is highly motivating. In 'sink' schools students regard low-achievement as inevitable, education as worthless and prepare themselves for a life of failure by avoiding work (it's easier to be a 'cool' naughty kid than it is to be a 'cool' studious kid).
In the UK Bristol (I think that is right) is experimenting with a system in which they have tried to create perfect equality across their secondary schools (students entering from Primary are mixed acrosss attainment, giving each school the same percentage of high-achievers,and low-achievers). It's too early to tell now but it will be interesting to see their results.
|
|
Here is a reference that has me off by a few thousand dollars. It also has a community comparison. If you need more than this, please ask.That article is very misleading, it makes it sound like the teachers are only being asked to work 25 more minutes a day when the actual increase in time spent working is considerably more. Also, the median income of the area is not the same as cost of living. It's entirely possible that everyone in that area is just massively poor. To put in perspective the things the district is asking the teachers to do without compensation, imagine if your boss called all the employees up one day and said "Alright, in order to improve productivity we want you all to work 5 hours overtime everyday without any kind of pay at all."
What I like is the line: "[E]at lunch with students once in a while..."
I usually wolf down my lunch in about five minutes and spend the rest of lunchtime running clubs, giving students support with homework, liaising with other teachers, etc.
If US teachers get to spend lunchtime flicking through the newspaper and discussing arthouse cinema perhaps I need to emigrate.
This says between $33 and $54.
If this is average US teacher pay
Why were they earning so much more? Were they?
Might the *fact* that this school was already paying way over the state average be indicative of earlier management failure, or are other factors involved (struggling to recruit?)
I wasn't trying to say that they were being payed the average for teachers, but that it's unfair to compare them to the surrounding area which has already been stated as a poor community. The links you provided, along with the figures on these RI teacher's salaries from other links, provides a much more accurate picture on whether they were being overpaid or not.
With benefits it gets closer to $80.
Here is a reference that has me off by a few thousand dollars. It also has a community comparison. If you need more than this, please ask.That article is very misleading, it makes it sound like the teachers are only being asked to work 25 more minutes a day when the actual increase in time spent working is considerably more. Also, the median income of the area is not the same as cost of living. It's entirely possible that everyone in that area is just massively poor. To put in perspective the things the district is asking the teachers to do without compensation, imagine if your boss called all the employees up one day and said "Alright, in order to improve productivity we want you all to work 5 hours overtime everyday without any kind of pay at all."What I like is the line: "[E]at lunch with students once in a while..."
I usually wolf down my lunch in about five minutes and spend the rest of lunchtime running clubs, giving students support with homework, liaising with other teachers, etc.
If US teachers get to spend lunchtime flicking through the newspaper and discussing arthouse cinema perhaps I need to emigrate.
Most US teachers use lunch as a prep time for the rest of the days classes.
|
|
Most US teachers use lunch as a prep time for the rest of the days classes.Here is a reference that has me off by a few thousand dollars. It also has a community comparison. If you need more than this, please ask.That article is very misleading, it makes it sound like the teachers are only being asked to work 25 more minutes a day when the actual increase in time spent working is considerably more. Also, the median income of the area is not the same as cost of living. It's entirely possible that everyone in that area is just massively poor. To put in perspective the things the district is asking the teachers to do without compensation, imagine if your boss called all the employees up one day and said "Alright, in order to improve productivity we want you all to work 5 hours overtime everyday without any kind of pay at all."What I like is the line: "[E]at lunch with students once in a while..."
I usually wolf down my lunch in about five minutes and spend the rest of lunchtime running clubs, giving students support with homework, liaising with other teachers, etc.
If US teachers get to spend lunchtime flicking through the newspaper and discussing arthouse cinema perhaps I need to emigrate.
Damnit! I guess I'll just stay where I am.
Interestingly, according to current exchange rates I earn $32.160 pa, but then the UK has universal healthcare and other services, but then we also have higher taxes...
TO be honest, if the situation has been allowed to drift for so long I'd be looking to replace whatever board or committee has oversight of education in the area.
|
I live in RI. As a local I might be able to help you with this...
I have a good friend who teaches at a school in RI near Central Falls, and your summary matches pretty closely with her report on the situation. One other part she mentioned is that the "transformation" package that the union rejected was pretty bad, was essentially the same as "turnaround" (most teachers fired, remaining teachers salaries slashed, larger classes, etc). She also mentioned that the principal of Central Falls got fired at the same time too (which is really unusual, I suppose).
Basically she summed it up as another attempt to break the teachers' union. The administration doesn't have any better idea how to improve the educational experience except to try to make the teachers' jobs harder and less remunerative.
|
Here is a reference that has me off by a few thousand dollars. It also has a community comparison. If you need more than this, please ask.That article is very misleading, it makes it sound like the teachers are only being asked to work 25 more minutes a day when the actual increase in time spent working is considerably more. Also, the median income of the area is not the same as cost of living. It's entirely possible that everyone in that area is just massively poor. To put in perspective the things the district is asking the teachers to do without compensation, imagine if your boss called all the employees up one day and said "Alright, in order to improve productivity we want you all to work 5 hours overtime everyday without any kind of pay at all."
I thought that what they were being asked to do had already been discussed earlier on in this thread... I can get references for that to. In the end, that they could not get 90 dollars an hour for these extra duties is what broke the deal. 90 dollars an hour. It staggers the mind.
It has also been established that this is not a wealthy community further up thread.
It is more misleading though for you to somehow equate that to a situation where there is 5 hours a day mandatory overtime with no compensation. The hours would not have been near that (of course!) and they were just not offered what they felt was adequete compensation.
|
|
Here is a reference that has me off by a few thousand dollars. It also has a community comparison. If you need more than this, please ask.That article is very misleading, it makes it sound like the teachers are only being asked to work 25 more minutes a day when the actual increase in time spent working is considerably more. Also, the median income of the area is not the same as cost of living. It's entirely possible that everyone in that area is just massively poor. To put in perspective the things the district is asking the teachers to do without compensation, imagine if your boss called all the employees up one day and said "Alright, in order to improve productivity we want you all to work 5 hours overtime everyday without any kind of pay at all."What I like is the line: "[E]at lunch with students once in a while..."
I usually wolf down my lunch in about five minutes and spend the rest of lunchtime running clubs, giving students support with homework, liaising with other teachers, etc.
If US teachers get to spend lunchtime flicking through the newspaper and discussing arthouse cinema perhaps I need to emigrate.
I hear they are hiring in Central Falls... :D
|
|
With benefits it gets closer to $80.
And these were mostly "top tier" teachers... Which is why the numbers skew higher.
|
|
I live in RI. As a local I might be able to help you with this...I have a good friend who teaches at a school in RI near Central Falls, and your summary matches pretty closely with her report on the situation. One other part she mentioned is that the "transformation" package that the union rejected was pretty bad, was essentially the same as "turnaround" (most teachers fired, remaining teachers salaries slashed, larger classes, etc). She also mentioned that the principal of Central Falls got fired at the same time too (which is really unusual, I suppose).
Basically she summed it up as another attempt to break the teachers' union. The administration doesn't have any better idea how to improve the educational experience except to try to make the teachers' jobs harder and less remunerative.
The Principal did get fired... Everyone in that building was let go.
I do not understand the union busting comment though...
This initiative is from President Obama's Education Secretary, and it would be hard to paint Obama as a union buster.
Again, this is not a rhode Island initiative. Rhode Island is merely the first state moving forward with a Federal mandate.
Just because Obama put him in place doesn't mean everything he does reflects Obamas views exactly.
I think the schools receive enough money right now, the money just isn’t going to the right places. When I was in high school my teachers were underpaid, close to going on strike. School supplies were extremely limited, we had out dated books. However, we apparently had tons of money to pay for a new gymnasium and tech center. Even in high school I thought that was wasteful, but now that I’m in construction I can see it was more so than I ever realized. There is a high level of corruption in education construction. Manufacturing reps bribe the spec writers all the time to make sure their product is only one listed.
I can really only get into the specifics of roofing, as that is the industry I’m in. Most schools spec a company named Garland for their roofing, and schools are the only place you will see a Garland spec. Why? Because Garland roofing is 3 to 5 times more expensive than any other kind of comparable roofing system, and because the 30 year warranty they give isn’t worth the paper it’s written on. These Garland reps take the spec writers out to ‘friendly’ golf games where they make the ‘friendly wager’ of a mere $1,000 a hole, and then throw the game. At the end of the day the school spec writer has $18,000 of Garland money in his pocket, and is more than happy to be Garland’s b@**@.
So, instead of the schools spending $160k for the roof of a new school they are paying half a million. That’s over 300k that could be going to books, or teacher’s pay, or roofing another whole school to cut down on over crowding. And that’s just the amount they waste on roofing, I can’t imagine how much they waste in the rest of a school’s construction.
This goes way beyond education. Things like this seem to be the norm for all kinds of state and municipal projects, utilities, and other "public private partnerships".
Why aren't the elementary and middle schools that were "teaching" and passing the students to the next grade every year responsible?
They're accountable in terms of not failing kids. I taught in a district that practiced "social promotion;" kids could not fail until they hit 9th grade. Schools that held kids back faced legal action for "irreparably damaging their self-esteem." We all knew the kids had way too much self-esteem, and nowhere near enough self-respect, but we didn't make the rules.
I taught 9th grade Earth Science. The glassware in the cabinets could easily pass my class. Yet I had any number of kids fail my class year after year, until they reached 21 or went to prison.
They're accountable in terms of not failing kids. I taught in a district that practiced "social promotion;" kids could not fail until they hit 9th grade.
I taught for a few years at a school that attempted to implement a "no students fail" policy. When report card time rolled around, I turned in my grades for review, including the Fs. The principal told me we couldn't put Fs on report cards. I told her that if she wanted I'd leave those spaces blank and she could put whatever she wanted to in those spaces for the grades, but that I wasn't going to lie to my students and parents.
Those students who had earned Fs in my classes got Fs on their report cards, and that was the end of the "no students fail" policy at that school.
This was a pretty small school. All by myself, I represented about 10% of the faculty. I have a suspicion that 10% is a good benchmark for school improvement. Get 10% of the teachers, especially the good ones, to take a stand and things could actually improve.
Of course, I've not conducted a thorough study. It's just a hypothesis.
:)
My middle school had kind of a "no fail" policy. You could get Fs, it just really didn't matter. I saw kids who got all Fs and went on to high school. After I learned it wouldn't matter I failed a class on principal. Not on the principal that I could fail and it wouldn’t matter mind you, it was on the principal that the class was a complete waste of time, and frankly a little insulting.
|
I see good old-fashioned union busting is back. Because plain and simple that is exactly what this is.Ermmm?!?!? What evidence do you see of that?
Exactly, Rhode Island is not a right to work state, according to my research, and therefore any teachers they hire back would still have to be union workers.
|
|
I was listening to talk radio on my way to work today and was interested to hear several of the teachers were already doing the things called for in "transformation", and others were willing to begin.
The teachers seemed really upset that the union never asked them what they wanted. And here I thought unions represented the workers... Silly me.
Quote of the morning ~ "It is time to stop worrying about what is best for the adults and start worrying about what is best for the kids."
Quote of the morning ~ "It is time to stop worrying about what is best for the adults and start worrying about what is best for the kids."
As if in education the two are somehow different or mutually exclusive. In the classroom, what is best for the students is best for the adults working with those students.
I removed an insulting post. The responses to it also were removed.
Power to the proletariat!?
Exactly, Rhode Island is not a right to work state, according to my research, and therefore any teachers they hire back would still have to be union workers.I see good old-fashioned union busting is back. Because plain and simple that is exactly what this is.Ermmm?!?!? What evidence do you see of that?I checked that site... it's bunch of FUD. Unions are the vehicle for representation of workers concerns in the only legitimate mechanism available... the power of collective bargaining. Because without a collective force behind him... the worker alone by himself has virtually no means of redress. Salaries and benefits for non union employees for the same job are always lower.
Mass firings of union employees where all the employees are fired for no other reason than being a union is not a matter of labor discipline it's a tactic of mass intimidation.
Salaries and benefits for non union employees doing the same work are not always lower. I know a specific example here in Colorado where many non union iron workers got paid as much or more than the Denver local with similar or better benefits. I've also seen similar things with the boiler makers although I'm not familiar with their benefits package.
Union Journeymen painters on the other hand may make 33 to 100 percent more than their non organized counter parts in Colorado unless the painter starts his own business.
|
|
Exactly, Rhode Island is not a right to work state, according to my research, and therefore any teachers they hire back would still have to be union workers.I see good old-fashioned union busting is back. Because plain and simple that is exactly what this is.Ermmm?!?!? What evidence do you see of that?I checked that site... it's bunch of FUD. Unions are the vehicle for representation of workers concerns in the only legitimate mechanism available... the power of collective bargaining. Because without a collective force behind him... the worker alone by himself has virtually no means of redress. Salaries and benefits for non union employees for the same job are always lower.
Mass firings of union employees where all the employees are fired for no other reason than being a union is not a matter of labor discipline it's a tactic of mass intimidation.
Salaries and benefits for non union employees doing the same work are not always lower. I know a specific example here in Colorado where many non union iron workers got paid as much or more than the Denver local with similar or better benefits. I've also seen similar things with the boiler makers although I'm not familiar with their benefits package.
Similarly, here in Utah I worked in a shop that had a union. The union's contract clearly stated that all employees would receive the same wages and benefits regardless of whether they were union or not. In fact non-union employees were even entitled to have a union rep present during disciplinary proceedings.
And being a member of a union does not always mean better treatment. My brother in law is a union member down in Las Vegas. He was about to journey out in April, but the work started to dry up. Because the union shop he worked for could get away with paying apprentices with less experience less than him, he was one of the first employees cut from the shop. Sure he gets compensation from the union hall, but he will miss his chance to take the journeyman's test because he is not working.
Firing all the teachers was justified
Easy. I expect teachers to do it by putting aside the excuses, setting higher expectations, adhering to better standards, giving into common sense reforms and doing their jobs in a school that serves a vulnerable population that is especially in need of a quality education -- but also, and here's the good news, in many cases, extra motivated to get one.
I can not help but wonder why he is not still teaching K-12 in central California.