Entire school staff fired

[Darth Cruel]

I bet this is kind of a scary thought for some teachers. Especially if you are in a school that is in the lowest 5% academically in your district. Seems like an extreme measure even though up to 50% of them can be rehired for the next school year. Getting fired will still make them lose their tenure and some benefits will have to start over.

firethemallandletgodsortthemout

 

[agen_kolar]

That's a pretty ****ty thing to do because surely some of them were good teachers and shouldn't have to be rehired.

 

[karamazov80]

That's such a complicated issue. Yeah, I'm sure that some of the teachers and administrative staff were to blame, but when you are talking about one of the poorest towns in the state, the deck is already stacked against those guys. The problems are primarily socio-economic and cultural (those families probably don't care about or understand the importance of education), and there is only so much any teacher or principal can do. But then, the teachers apparently had an "out" to do some extra work without too much extra pay and turned it down, so in that sense, maybe they only have themselves to blame. You've got to know when to fold 'em sometimes.

Jesus, I hope I never have to be a public school teacher.

 

[Darth Cruel]

That's such a complicated issue. Yeah, I'm sure that some of the teachers and administrative staff were to blame, but when you are talking about one of the poorest towns in the state, the deck is already stacked against those guys. The problems are primarily socio-economic and cultural (those families probably don't care about or understand the importance of education), and there is only so much any teacher or principal can do. But then, the teachers apparently had an "out" to do some extra work without too much extra pay and turned it down, so in that sense, maybe they only have themselves to blame. You've got to know when to fold 'em sometimes.

Jesus, I hope I never have to be a public school teacher.

Both are good points. I am looking forward to my wife getting home from snowboarding with my kids so I can ask her what she thinks of this. She is a teacher.

 

[karamazov80]

My mom was a public school teacher at a vocational school, and it was a pretty unrewarding, unappreciated job for the most part. She had a couple of good success stories that must have kept her at it, but damn. . .like I said, I wouldn't want to do it, particularly if you are teaching in a place where the kids and parents really don't care about education. Teaching college is bad enough with all the apathy and laziness.

 

[316what]

That's such a complicated issue. Yeah, I'm sure that some of the teachers and administrative staff were to blame, but when you are talking about one of the poorest towns in the state, the deck is already stacked against those guys. The problems are primarily socio-economic and cultural (those families probably don't care about or understand the importance of education), and there is only so much any teacher or principal can do. But then, the teachers apparently had an "out" to do some extra work without too much extra pay and turned it down, so in that sense, maybe they only have themselves to blame. You've got to know when to fold 'em sometimes.

Jesus, I hope I never have to be a public school teacher.

Agree with most. But the teachers and administration agreed to the extra work. Not until after it started did the administration come back and say "oh, btw, we can't pay you for this extra work." When the teachers' union got involved, it got ugly.

Plenty of blame on both sides. But in the end, only the kids will suffer. Part of the solution is to get rid of the unions because they're basically only accomplishing two things:

1- increasing taxes that have to be paid for education;
2- protecting the worst teachers and preventing them from being fired when they should be.

And most districts could get rid of 50% of the "administration" and still function efficiently.

I'm well aware there are "exceptions" and unions have intervened and acted when it was warranted. But it doesn't appear to be a case of the pros outweighing the cons.

BTW, I've been on both sides of labor issues so I have a little knowledge of what goes on.

 

[Bamboota]

That harsh...but i bet most of them where sucky teachers anywayz. So....Bamboota = Apathetic.

 

[316what]

That harsh...but i bet most of them where sucky teachers anywayz. So....Bamboota = Apathetic.

Sorry Boo, but I think that's too easy of a generalization to make. This story reminds me of the movie Lean on Me....especially with the description of the socio-economic environment and administration focus on "statistics." This environment is a huge test for even the most dedicated teachers and a breeding ground for Apathy. They're pretty much in a no win situation.

 

[karamazov80]

Agree with most. But the teachers and administration agreed to the extra work. Not until after it started did the administration come back and say "oh, btw, we can't pay you for this extra work." When the teachers' union got involved, it got ugly.

I get that, but they apparently were willing to pay for some of it, and that's what these situations have to be about--compromise. If you are in a badly performing district in this era of "school accountability," then I think it is fair to expect the teachers in those districts to take on extra work. That way, they can show that they are trying to do what it might take to help turn things around, even if there is only so much they could do. If those guys don't like it, then they should move to a district where the kids do better, and where jobs aren't going to be in jeopardy like that. Teachers have to learn to play the game just like everyone else in this environment.

Of course, we don't know all the details here, and I'm sure it is a more complicated situation, but like you say, the kids are the ones who really matter here, and so no one wins when the kids lose, IMO. I think that unlike jobs in private industry (and even regarding private schools, which are more business-like), teachers, administrators, school board members, and local legislators/governors alike should do whatever it takes to ensure that that is their priority. Unfortunately, I suspect a lot of those people don't feel that way. Schools teach to tests and essentially stop trying to keep kids in the schools if they aren't doing well (I work for a truancy program in the state, and have seen this). This is all a by-product of the "no child left behind" business, and the "race to the top" stuff will probably be only marginally better. Theoretically it is all good, but people often do what they have to, and no more, and sometimes they violate the spirit of these laws when they do so.

 

[316what]

I get that, but they apparently were willing to pay for some of it, and that's what these situations have to be about--compromise. If you are in a badly performing district in this era of "school accountability," then I think it is fair to expect the teachers in those districts to take on extra work. That way, they can show that they are trying to do what it might take to help turn things around, even if there is only so much they could do. If those guys don't like it, then they should move to a district where the kids do better, and where jobs aren't going to be in jeopardy like that. Teachers have to learn to play the game just like everyone else in this environment.

Of course, we don't know all the details here, and I'm sure it is a more complicated situation, but like you say, the kids are the ones who really matter here, and so no one wins when the kids lose, IMO. I think that unlike jobs in private industry (and even regarding private schools, which are more business-like), teachers, administrators, school board members, and local legislators/governors alike should do whatever it takes to ensure that that is their priority. Unfortunately, I suspect a lot of those people don't feel that way. Schools teach to tests and essentially stop trying to keep kids in the schools if they aren't doing well (I work for a truancy program in the state, and have seen this). This is all a by-product of the "no child left behind" business, and the "race to the top" stuff will probably be only marginally better. Theoretically it is all good, but people often do what they have to, and no more, and sometimes they violate the spirit of these laws when they do so.

My fellow Coonazz, I'm really in agreement with you. It's just the way I read it, full pay was either agreed upon or implied. Then later the admin said you still have to work extra but we "can't" pay you. Then big brother Mr. Union Man stepped in and it went to H E double hockey sticks.

But you're somewhat advocating these teachers work extra for no compensation solely out of a sense of duty. What about their duty to their families, continuing education, part time jobs, etc. all which take a backseat? Just playing devil's advocate here.

Until something (and I don't know what) is done about teacher pay, the problem won't get any better. There are school teachers around the country who are living below the poverty line and that is just sad.

 

[King Darkness]

I had a teacher that cut off the tip of a girls nose with scissors and he didnt get fired.

True story

 

[The Ween]

I bet this is kind of a scary thought for some teachers. Especially if you are in a school that is in the lowest 5% academically in your district. Seems like an extreme measure even though up to 50% of them can be rehired for the next school year. Getting fired will still make them lose their tenure and some benefits will have to start over.

firethemallandletgodsortthemout

Most of the reasons why schools aren't doing well is because of the administrations and the state and federal governments.

I hope they sue.

 

[The Ween]

Agree with most. But the teachers and administration agreed to the extra work. Not until after it started did the administration come back and say "oh, btw, we can't pay you for this extra work." When the teachers' union got involved, it got ugly.

Plenty of blame on both sides. But in the end, only the kids will suffer. Part of the solution is to get rid of the unions because they're basically only accomplishing two things:

1- increasing taxes that have to be paid for education;
2- protecting the worst teachers and preventing them from being fired when they should be.

And most districts could get rid of 50% of the "administration" and still function efficiently.

I'm well aware there are "exceptions" and unions have intervened and acted when it was warranted. But it doesn't appear to be a case of the pros outweighing the cons.

BTW, I've been on both sides of labor issues so I have a little knowledge of what goes on.

I agree with alot of the things you've been saying, but getting rid of the unions isn't one. If you think teacher's are underpaid now, without the unions, they really wouldn't be making alot of money.

In our district, the teacher's are paid very well. In the bigger cities and urban areas, you couldn't pay me enough to teach there.

Yes there are some bad teachers, just like in all professions, but to punish them all just isn't right.

 

[karamazov80]

Until something (and I don't know what) is done about teacher pay, the problem won't get any better. There are school teachers around the country who are living below the poverty line and that is just sad.

I agree with that, for sure. Our priorities as a country are far from what they should be. Teachers should have fair, living wages with good benefits in every state. And I don't completely disagree with anything you say. If an agreement was reneged on, then that is just wrong. And if the union was incapable of orchestrating a mutually beneficial compromise, then that's wrong too.

And I don't mean to suggest that these people should sacrifice purely out of a sense of duty, but perhaps everyone should be a little less selfish when the well-being of innocent children is of issue. And certainly when their own economic livelihood is at stake. Easier to fulfill your family duties when you have a job than when you don't, IMO, even if the job you have isn't ideal.

 

[Kibishii]

**Long post but please read**
I want to begin by saying, yes, there are very bad teachers and teachers who are completely apathetic and ineffective. There are also administrators who are completely overwhelmed and unproductive. However...

I teach 5th grade at a public elementary school in Fontana, California. Just to give you a quick overview of our school:
89% of our students are Hispanic (46% of those being English Language Learners)
90% of our school participates in the "free/reduced lunch program" because of the parents economic status.
We also live in an area that is filled with meth, about 1/2 of our school come from the surrounding apartments, and we have a huge mobility (students moving) percentage.
MOST of our parents did not graduate high school.
Our district's budget is so negative that they recently bumped all class size to 33 to lay off teachers and concreted over 70% of the schools greenery to save on water/upkeep.

I bust my ass for my students. I come in before school for math intervention (not paid) and I also provide board games and such for the students performing at grade level so they don't have to stand outside on the concrete. I tutor in Language Arts every Monday and Tuesday afterschool for an hour (I get paid for those). I give standardized assessments, reassess based on need, and do all interventions possible. When I have students working far below grade level standards, I immediately start the SST process. Twice a year, I hold afterschool English Fluency trainings for parents.

That said, I am still ALWAYS running uphill considering that my class consists of the following:

• three resource students (special ed)
• one level one ELD student (doesn't speak English)
• two students in a foster home
• two kids with behavior modification plans
• two kids with ADHD w/out hyperactivity that are not medicated and/or getting behavior assistance because California recently cut ADHD from the Healthy Kids healthcare program

I live in an upper-middle class neighborhood in Redlands, CA where my kids will go to a school that is over 60% white and 7% English Language Learners. Do you really think, no matter how much time I spend or what techniques I use, that my school will perform as well on their state assessments as the students at my son's school?


Bush's No Child Left Behind really started all these "accountability" goals that put impossible requirements on schools when really the whole point was to push the way for more charter schools and private school vouchers. Ok, go to those charter/private schools and most of the time you will find out that they do not take the same standardized test that the state requires of public schools and they do not accept RSP students or students with behavior issues.

**Ok, rant off **

My school has made both its AYP and API and we got out of "program improvement" in our first year. I personally think this is due to all the teachers agreeing to take an additional 80 hours of unpaid training a year to get a "Reading First" grant that got the school seven achievement subs and we also have an awesome principal. However, I had a good friend at South Tamarind elementary who was a great teacher, but the administration at that school was a revolving door and she lost her job/tenure when the entire staff was replace because they were in program improvement 3.

My point is that socio-economic issues are very, very real and having politicians say that "every kid should be proficient (a C student)" regardless of their environment, family life, and upbringing is an impossible goal. Yet, that is what is expected and schools/teachers/principals are being punished when that doesn't happen. Seriously think about it.

 

[hairlesswookiee]

Wow talk about crazy. So how are they going to replace the staff that they are letting go?? If they are only going to allow half of them to reapply, they are still short right??

~~I don't know about how teachers are employed, but are they obligated to finish the school year?? If not, I'd definitely start searching elsewhere for employment in a different district.

 

[The Ween]

**Long post but please read**
I want to begin by saying, yes, there are very bad teachers and teachers who are completely apathetic and ineffective. There are also administrators who are completely overwhelmed and unproductive. However...

I teach 5th grade at a public elementary school in Fontana, California. Just to give you a quick overview of our school:
89% of our students are Hispanic (46% of those being English Language Learners)
90% of our school participates in the "free/reduced lunch program" because of the parents economic status.
We also live in an area that is filled with meth, about 1/2 of our school come from the surrounding apartments, and we have a huge mobility (students moving) percentage.
MOST of our parents did not graduate high school.
Our district's budget is so negative that they recently bumped all class size to 33 to lay off teachers and concreted over 70% of the schools greenery to save on water/upkeep.

I bust my ass for my students. I come in before school for math intervention (not paid) and I also provide board games and such for the students performing at grade level so they don't have to stand outside on the concrete. I give standardized assessments, reassess based on need, and do all interventions possible. When I have students working far below grade level standards, I immediately start the SST process. Twice a year, I hold afterschool English Fluency trainings for parents.


That said, I am still ALWAYS running uphill considering that my class consists of the following:

• three resource students (special ed)
• one level one ELD student (doesn't speak English)
• two students in a foster home
• two kids with behavior modification plans
• two kids with ADHD w/out hyperactivity that are not medicated and/or getting behavior assistance because California recently cut ADHD from the Healthy Kids healthcare program

I live in an upper-middle class neighborhood in Redlands, CA where my kids will go to a school that is over 60% white and 7% English Language Learners. Do you really think, no matter how much time I spend or what techniques I use, that my school will perform as well on their state assessments as the students at my son's school?


Bush's No Child Left Behind really started all these "accountability" goals that put impossible requirements on schools when really the whole point was to push the way for more charter schools and private school vouchers. Ok, go to those charter/private schools and most of the time you will find out that they do not take the same standardized test that the state requires of public schools and they do not accept RSP students or students with behavior issues.

**Ok, rant off **

My school has made both its AYP and API and we got out of "program improvement" in our first year. I personally think this is due to all the teachers agreeing to take an additional 80 hours of unpaid training a year to get a "Reading First" grant that got the school seven achievement subs and we also have an awesome principal. However, I had a good friend at South Tamarind elementary who was a great teacher, but the administration at that school was a revolving door and she lost her job/tenure when the entire staff was replace because they were in program improvement 3.

My point is that socio-economic issues are very, very real and having politicians say that "every kid should be proficient (a C student)" regardless of their environment, family life, and upbringing is an impossible goal. Yet, that is what is expected and schools/teachers/principals are being punished when that doesn't happen. Seriously think about it.

AMEN!!!! Until people actually take the time to understand what's going on, nothing is ever going to change.

No child left behind is a joke!

 

[The Ween]

Wow talk about crazy. So how are they going to replace the staff that they are letting go?? If they are only going to allow half of them to reapply, they are still short right??

~~I don't know about how teachers are employed, but are they obligated to finish the school year?? If not, I'd definitely start searching elsewhere for employment in a different district.

They can't make you work after you've been fired. If someone told me, hey I'm firing you, but I want you to finish the year first, I'd tell them to stick it! If they feel they aren't good enough to teach now, why would they want them to finish the year out. Wouldn't make sense.

I still hope they sue.

 

[hairlesswookiee]

They can't make you work after you've been fired. If someone told me, hey I'm firing you, but I want you to finish the year first, I'd tell them to stick it! If they feel they aren't good enough to teach now, why would they want them to finish the year out. Wouldn't make sense.

I still hope they sue.

Thanks for clarifying. In that case I would keep working until I found another job and try to start the new one at the end of the school year. But I would have a hard time not telling them to suck it.

 

[The Ween]

Thanks for clarifying. In that case I would keep working until I found another job and try to start the new one at the end of the school year. But I would have a hard time not telling them to suck it.

If they tried that in our school, they would be in a real bind because not only would all the teaching staff walk, but all the support staff as well. They wouldn't have anybody in the schools at all. Our unions are different but stick together.