Matt Damon Defends Teachers

[marine]

When talking about disbanding unions in education - why is the fear so great that teachers will just automatically become minimum wage earners?

I'd bet that if we got rid of unions, the teaching industry might take a small dip for a year and then people will realize the quality of education their kids are getting and the salaries will slowly tick up year after year after year.

supply & demand will push the career field to good wages with good employees/teachers.

 

[StevieD]

When talking about disbanding unions in education - why is the fear so great that teachers will just automatically become minimum wage earners?

I'd bet that if we got rid of unions, the teaching industry might take a small dip for a year and then people will realize the quality of education their kids are getting and the salaries will slowly tick up year after year after year.

supply & demand will push the career field to good wages with good employees/teachers.

Supply and demand does not work when the playing field is tilted. Unions keep it even. Is there a problem with some contracts, sure there are, but that is why those big wage earning pencil pushing execs get hired to negotiate.
I don't like tenure either. But there must be a reason for it. If not they can negotiate it out of the contracts. Don't need to break a union because you don't like the deal that was struck.

 

[Duff Miver]

I don't like tenure either. But there must be a reason for it.

There's a very good reason for tenure. It gives teachers academic freedom, freedom to teach based on fact. Without tenure, administrators could force teachers to teach crazy stuff, like some Texas school boards have tried to force teachers to teach creationism without any reference to evolution. In other cases, administrators or boards have tried to force teachers, on threat of dismissal, to teach political or religious dogma. Tenure is what stands between education and indoctrination.

This explains tenure well -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenure

 

[StevieD]

There's a very good reason for tenure. It gives teachers academic freedom, freedom to teach based on fact. Without tenure, administrators could force teachers to teach crazy stuff, like some Texas school boards have tried to force teachers to teach creationism without any reference to evolution. In other cases, administrators or boards have tried to force teachers, on threat of dismissal, to teach political or religious dogma. Tenure is what stands between education and indoctrination.

This explains tenure well -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenure

Thank you Sir! See, I knew there was a reason for something that on the surface seem so stupid.

 

[Mags]

Supply and demand does not work when the playing field is tilted.

Seems to work for 85-90% of America - not sure why you think it doesn't work. I'll agree, it doesn't work for the lazy or bad employee. Precisely who the unions are there to protect.

Yep, tenure exists to further the liberal teachings and unionism.

 

[Mags]

There's a very good reason for tenure. It gives teachers academic freedom, freedom to teach based on fact. Without tenure, administrators could force teachers to teach crazy stuff, like some Texas school boards have tried to force teachers to teach creationism without any reference to evolution. In other cases, administrators or boards have tried to force teachers, on threat of dismissal, to teach political or religious dogma. Tenure is what stands between education and indoctrination.

This explains tenure well -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenure

Oh, you mean like in CA, where teachers are forced to indoctrinate by teaching GAY HISTORY? :mj07:

 

[Trampled Underfoot]

Oh, you mean like in CA, where teachers are forced to indoctrinate by teaching GAY HISTORY? :mj07:

Another piece for the maggot hall of fame.

 

[Duff Miver]

Maggot should demand a refund for being brought into this world incurably defective.

 

[Mags]

Another piece for the maggot hall of fame.

You can't make this shit up.... .it's true....

July 22, 2011 from KQED
Gay history is now a requirement in California public schools because of a new state law that says the contributions of gays and lesbians must be included in social studies instruction. Now teachers are figuring out how to incorporate the new material into their classes.


I guess my "hall of fame" are the true statements I made that the liberal TU disagrees with???

 

[SixFive]

Wish I would have gone into teaching like my folks and a lot of my family. No unions here for teacher either.

I think by far the worst teachers u will encounter are the pinheads at the universities. People who have all this education and can do nothing with it except teach underclassmen. Many are professional students stuck in a teaching role they do not want because they can find no other form of gainful employment. They don't do it bc they love to teach. Sadly, they are the most protected too even when everyone involved knows they do a chitty job.

 

[Duff Miver]

You can't make this shit up.... .it's true....

July 22, 2011 from KQED
Gay history is now a requirement in California public schools because of a new state law that says the contributions of gays and lesbians must be included in social studies instruction. Now teachers are figuring out how to incorporate the new material into their classes.

And if gay history is a fact, why should it not be covered the same as any historical fact....other than your personal mental problem with homophobia?

Still having those wet dreams about men? :142hump:

 

[StevieD]

Seems to work for 85-90% of America - not sure why you think it doesn't work. I'll agree, it doesn't work for the lazy or bad employee. Precisely who the unions are there to protect.



Yep, tenure exists to further the liberal teachings and unionism.

You think we are working on a fair dose of Supply and demand? :142smilie :142smilie

I am a true beiliever in Supply and Demand but you have the keep the playing field fair.

 

[Mags]

And if gay history is a fact, why should it not be covered the same as any historical fact....other than your personal mental problem with homophobia?

Still having those wet dreams about men? :142hump:

What the hell does gay or straight or lesbian or polygamist have to do with history?

What do we need "gay history" - if someone did something important to put in the history book, great, but I really don't see the need to specifically point out his sexual preference.

Can you imagine: Abraham Lincoln, a gay man, was our 16th president. WTF cares?

Jeesh

 

[Mags]

You think we are working on a fair dose of Supply and demand? :142smilie :142smilie

I am a true beiliever in Supply and Demand but you have the keep the playing field fair.

I agree. I think our definitions of fair are different.

Mine is: every person is judged based on their own abilities and talent and is rewarded based on that. They are free to seek employment from anyone at any time, and free to leave that employment. The employer has the same right to terminate employment for any reason. True supply and demand.

Yours APPEARS to be - every person is not judged individually, but rather based on the collective effort. Nobody is singled out for good or bad performance. The employee can leave employment and seek another job at any time, but at no time can the employer terminate the employee without the collective approval of the union. The employer is also prohibited from paying high performers more, and worse performers less (or getting rid of them).

The top scenario sounds much more balanced. The bottom scenario is tilted against the company towards the union.

 

[Trampled Underfoot]

What the hell does gay or straight or lesbian or polygamist have to do with history?

What do we need "gay history" - if someone did something important to put in the history book, great, but I really don't see the need to specifically point out his sexual preference.

Can you imagine: Abraham Lincoln, a gay man, was our 16th president. WTF cares?

Jeesh

Just because you don't want to acknowledge the struggles of a group of people that you are scared of does not mean it will not further the mind of others to understand their plight. Your bigotry is now approaching epic proportions.

 

[Duff Miver]

Yep, tenure exists to further the liberal teachings and unionism.

Did you never pass even one grammar school history course?

Tenure exists to stop shit like this -

http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/galileo/galileoaccount.html

 

[Duff Miver]

Mine is: every person is judged based on their own abilities and talent and is rewarded based on that.

If that were true, you'd be starving in a Calcutta gutter.

 

[StevieD]

I agree. I think our definitions of fair are different.

Mine is: every person is judged based on their own abilities and talent and is rewarded based on that. They are free to seek employment from anyone at any time, and free to leave that employment. The employer has the same right to terminate employment for any reason. True supply and demand.

Yours APPEARS to be - every person is not judged individually, but rather based on the collective effort. Nobody is singled out for good or bad performance. The employee can leave employment and seek another job at any time, but at no time can the employer terminate the employee without the collective approval of the union. The employer is also prohibited from paying high performers more, and worse performers less (or getting rid of them).

The top scenario sounds much more balanced. The bottom scenario is tilted against the company towards the union.

Actually, I think more like your scenerio but I do not live in the dream world that you do. I live on planet earth.

 

[StevieD]

I agree. I think our definitions of fair are different.

Mine is: every person is judged based on their own abilities and talent and is rewarded based on that. They are free to seek employment from anyone at any time, and free to leave that employment. The employer has the same right to terminate employment for any reason. True supply and demand.

Yours APPEARS to be - every person is not judged individually, but rather based on the collective effort. Nobody is singled out for good or bad performance. The employee can leave employment and seek another job at any time, but at no time can the employer terminate the employee without the collective approval of the union. The employer is also prohibited from paying high performers more, and worse performers less (or getting rid of them).

The top scenario sounds much more balanced. The bottom scenario is tilted against the company towards the union.

Actually, I think more like your scenerio but I do not live in the dream world that you do. I live on planet earth. I guess slavery happened. I guess predjudice never existed. Certainly the Holocost never happened. The powerful never took adavantage of any situation. I kind of like your world. Where do I get on?

 

[Mags]

Actually, I think more like your scenerio but I do not live in the dream world that you do. I live on planet earth. I guess slavery happened. I guess predjudice never existed. Certainly the Holocost never happened. The powerful never took adavantage of any situation. I kind of like your world. Where do I get on?

"Is this heaven?"

"No, it's Wisconsin"!