When did
experience become such a bad thing in education? I continue to hear the same
tired reasons that teachers’ unions are bad because they are pro teacher,
which, in their minds, means we must be anti student. This line of reasoning is
wrong.
(1)
Paying teachers based off of years breathing and not by ability/effectiveness
is pro teacher and anti student.
1.
False – I believe teachers have short changed beginning teachers for years
using a traditional salary schedule awarding money for years of service. The
system works for school districts to budget and project funds needed for
salaries and provided a means to gradually get teachers to an appropriate salary.
What I can’t understand is the idea that paying teachers for effective service
will lead to savings. I represent over 1300 teachers and I can promise you that
the vast majority of our teachers are doing a great job. My district would not
save money for other programs using this system. I am all for changing to any
system that leads to greater teachers’ earnings. If, however; this is an
attempt to save money on the backs of teachers it is wrong. Why would you ever
pay an ineffective teacher a dime?
(2)
The practice of "last hired first fired" is pro teacher (senior
teachers that is) and anti student.
2.
False – When all things are equal and a teacher should be laid off which
teacher should be laid off? Either the teacher is able to do the job or not. It
is that simple. A teacher should not be laid off because they are ineffective
they should be fired.
(3)
The barriers unions place in front of administrators
3.
False – If an administrator can’t properly evaluate teachers they need to find
a different job. I do believe teachers should be given an opportunity to refine
their skills before being dismissed and the district should play a role in that
professional development. Any administrator that says there are too many
barriers to dismissing a teacher just doesn’t want to do the dirty work.
