4 ms·

How do you explain that while the NEA supports the firing teachers based on age, rather than merit - ejecting good young teachers while retaining old bad ones -

by Empact 16y ago

How do you explain that while the NEA supports the firing teachers based on age, rather than merit - ejecting good young teachers while retaining old bad ones - while it's innovative charter schools that can go right ahead in paying teachers highly in hopes of attracting the best teachers: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/05/education/05charter.html?_r=1&hpw http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/05/education/05charter.html?_... Who is sticking up for teachers there? The NEA, which supports age over talent? Or the charter, which is focused on attracting and retaining good teachers?

jbooth 16y ago
Did you read the comment you're responding to? I said they were wrong sometimes, specifically in regards to merit pay. I said that, in black and white, right there on the page. Or gray, because it's being downmodded because people who don't like the implications of it. Anyways, yeah. Charter schools. Whole other bag of worms. I like them in theory, in practice the way they're funded usually tends to be crooked -- quick example, in the town I was a Selectman in, a charter school started up. It cost us about 7k/year to educate a student, round numbers. Cost the charter school, say, 9k. Every student that left us for the charter school, 9k was taken from our budget and assigned to theirs. To add insult to injury, we actually had to pay to bus the kids there on top of it, plus additional unitemized strains on the police budget, etc. That's not exactly kosher.
- jbooth 16y ago
  Oh, and as far as "why" they support age vs merit (in other words, "last in first out", youngest teachers go first in a layoff), it's because that's how all the union contracts are structured, and that's wrong, but NEA is a product of the unions. Not defending, just explaining. I'd love to throw the NEA under the bus - the problem is, nobody else stands up for teachers.

by Empact 16y ago

jbooth 16y ago

Did you read the comment you're responding to? I said they were wrong sometimes, specifically in regards to merit pay. I said that, in black and white, right there on the page. Or gray, because it's being downmodded because people who don't like the implications of it. Anyways, yeah. Charter schools. Whole other bag of worms. I like them in theory, in practice the way they're funded usually tends to be crooked -- quick example, in the town I was a Selectman in, a charter school started up. It cost us about 7k/year to educate a student, round numbers. Cost the charter school, say, 9k. Every student that left us for the charter school, 9k was taken from our budget and assigned to theirs. To add insult to injury, we actually had to pay to bus the kids there on top of it, plus additional unitemized strains on the police budget, etc. That's not exactly kosher.

jbooth 16y ago
Oh, and as far as "why" they support age vs merit (in other words, "last in first out", youngest teachers go first in a layoff), it's because that's how all the union contracts are structured, and that's wrong, but NEA is a product of the unions. Not defending, just explaining. I'd love to throw the NEA under the bus - the problem is, nobody else stands up for teachers.