6 ms·

It is because of bullshit like this: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-207079/Evolution-banned-US-schools.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-207

It is because of bullshit like this: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-207079/Evolution-banned-US-schools.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-207079/Evolution-ban... "The word "evolution" will be removed from school books in the deep south of the United States under a new proposal." How much do you want to bet violating such a ban would lead to immediate dismissal without tenure protections? This is a school administrator that tried to get such a ban passed. EDIT: Since there seems to be some confusion, I've italicized the word immediate since people seem to think it was irrelevant.

dlss 12y ago
I think the courts are a better solution for that problem. Having a couple "crazy science teachers" with tenure shouldn't even count as a solution IMO - especially if that causes people to be more careful about who they give tenure to... EDIT: I said "better solution" not "perfect solution". I would love if you speculate about what a perfect solution is though!
- opendais 12y ago
  School administrators, not teachers, are the elected crazies.
- joeclark77 12y ago
  The courts? Have a judge pick the textbook? I can't think of anything that could possibly go wrong. School choice is the solution. Let parents hold the schools accountable, because they're the only ones (apparently) who put the kids' education ahead of political pet causes.
  - pavel_lishin 12y ago
    School choice may not be a viable option for lower income families, especially in non-urban settings.
    - refurb 12y ago
      It would be under a voucher system, but the teacher's union doesn't like that idea.
      - pavel_lishin 12y ago
        It's been awhile (high school) since I've read about voucher system; how do they work nowadays? Is there a way to cover transportation cost and time?
      - opendais 12y ago
        A voucher system that properly enabled children in poor neighborhoods (by covering the related costs) would be a good idea.
      - ironchef 12y ago
        It's not just the union as charter schools are (in general) just as mixed of a bag as public schools. There was a Stanford study back in 2009 that spanned 16 states and showed around 20 percent of charters outperformed and 35 percent of charters underperformed their peer public schools. Actually this reminds me they were supposed to have another round of outcomes last year or so. I'll have to go and see again how things have changed. (Offhand, it wouldn't surprise me if it's relatively close overall).
  - rrss1122 12y ago
    That's why lawmakers often want a voucher system, to give the lower income students the power of school choice.
    - joeclark77 12y ago
      You don't have to sell me on the idea, brother, I've been supporting vouchers since I heard of them. I think you're overly optimistic that there are "lawmakers" on our side, though. Even those from the ostensibly free-market party, when they get into power, rarely support programs that would reduce their own sphere of influence. It's hard to get re-elected by saying "Look what I didn't do for you."
      - opendais 12y ago
        School choice only works if it is enough to cover all the external costs as well as all the tuition at a private school. No lawmaker and few citizens are willing to pay for that. ;)
        glenra 12y ago
        The average private school costs quite a lot less than the average public school. You could spend about half as much per student and still get safer kids and happier parents. So what "external costs" are you thinking of? Going to a private school does involve travel, but so does going to your assigned public school. Depending on how the district lines are drawn and how centralized the district is, the trip might even be shorter.
        opendais 12y ago
        Source? When my ex girlfriend was shopping around for a private school the private schools in the area were both: A) More expensive (by about $3-5k/year) than what the local district spends. B) Were generally further and didn't provide a bus to pick the kids/drop them off at that distance.
        12y ago
- roc 12y ago
  > "I think the courts are a better solution for that problem." So who sues? The students who are under-served by a public education system that doesn't teach evolution? Let's suppose they find a jury of their peers that agrees, what does the court decision look like? A mandate for the hiring or retention of at least one teacher who will teach evolution? (Likely with redundancies. People retire, change jobs, get sick, etc.) And to ensure the ruling is respected one would imagine the district would have to go to further lengths to prove cause, if they ever want to remove that teacher, right? So all we'll have done is move the tenure track to the court docket, but only for those students/concerns that can shoulder the legal costs to pursue their rights, inevitably providing poorer service to poorer students and those seeking protections for minority concerns (which are disproportionately less likely to win a court case).
w1ntermute 12y ago
Sounds like the solution to that is to make it illegal to ban these topics (and then firmly enforce that law), rather than giving the teachers tenure.
- opendais 12y ago
  I think you've never experienced unofficial pressure in the workplace before when you need to put food on the table. ;) Tenure is much, much more effective than trying to make a law like that work reliably. Every time some new topic came up that was politically charged, you'd need to amend it. What happens when the people you consider to be the "wrong people" are in charge? They get their way.
  - yellowapple 12y ago
    If it's unofficial, then there's not much to be worried about. Do your job and you'll be fine. I honestly don't think tenure is more effective than actual legal enforcement, namely because tenure isn't really effective for that purpose at all, especially when we're considering that the older teachers - the ones who benefit from tenure - are the ones who are probably in support of such pressure, which is more likely directed at the younger teachers, relatively fresh from college, who want their students to learn about the proper science they learned about in school but are afraid to do so when their paychecks are on the line.
- Bud 12y ago
  That's not even in the possible range of solutions. Remember that lawmakers and law enforcers in red states are actively hostile towards teaching science, never mind teaching anything at all about the body, such as sex education. It's not going to be made illegal, and such laws will not and would not be enforced in the areas in which this is a problem to begin with, i.e., Republican areas.
  - w1ntermute 12y ago
    > Remember that lawmakers and law enforcers in red states are actively hostile towards teaching science, never mind teaching anything at all about the body, such as sex education. Then do it at the federal level. Fuck the troglodytes in the red states.
chamblin 12y ago
Isn't it just as, if not more, likely that a teacher would i.e. refuse to teach evolution (or even just be generally incompetent) and irremovable because of tenure? How does that improve anything?
- opendais 12y ago
  Ah, but that is a violation of the curriculum and clear cause for removal. Tenure isn't some magical invulnerability to being fired. It simply slows the process to a crawl and forces the collection of a mountain of evidence to fire someone for cause. If someone intentionally, and repeatedly, violates the curriculum you can fire a tenured teacher. You can't acquire that mountain of evidence in the 12 months between getting a ban on evolution passed and having it repealed in federal court.
  - joeclark77 12y ago
    You just contradicted yourself. You're saying here that tenure cannot enable teachers to defy the school board.
    - opendais 12y ago
      I didn't actually. Tenure doesn't give them immunity to the school board and/or other administrators. It does last long enough that abuses of the system and/or unofficial pressure to be resolved before the teacher actually loses their job. Firing a teacher with tenure can take 12+ months. Clearer?
      - Variance 12y ago
        Joe is right, you did contradict yourself. You originally said that tenure allows teachers to violate stupid school board decisions and to teach evolution anyway. Here, you said that tenure does not allow teachers to not teach evolution if the school board mandates it. Which is it? Can the school board fire teachers for not following the curriculum? If so, then school boards can stop teachers from teaching evolution. If not, then teachers can choose to teach Creationism. Either way, tenure doesn't matter.
eastbayjake 12y ago
The freedom to teach unpopular ideas also includes the freedom to teach that water has feelings and you can change its molecular structure by yelling at it, or that vaccines cause autism, or that global warming is all a bunch of bullshit made up by the liberal media. Pick your poison.
- opendais 12y ago
  Please cite examples of this actually occurring and the teacher not being fired for 12+ months? I used the word immediate for a reason that seems to be lost on some people :/
  - eastbayjake 12y ago
    No, I'm agreeing that a science teacher who taught kids that water has feelings would be fired immediately without tenure protections -- and deserves to be fired immediately! But tenure protections would not just protect an evolution teacher in Mississippi, it would also protect Gwyneth Paltrow's right to teach kids batshit crazy things about molecular chemistry based on new age pseudoscience. It cuts both ways.
ameister14 12y ago
You make a point in a later comment "Except a Creationist school district would be a violation of Church/State separation and the trial relating to that would stop the teacher from being fired." So tenure protects teachers long enough for such a trial to occur. I understand that. But wouldn't a wrongful termination suit do the same? After a couple of these, the State would pass guidelines on hiring and firing so that they don't get sued.

dlss 12y ago

I think the courts are a better solution for that problem. Having a couple "crazy science teachers" with tenure shouldn't even count as a solution IMO - especially if that causes people to be more careful about who they give tenure to... EDIT: I said "better solution" not "perfect solution". I would love if you speculate about what a perfect solution is though!

opendais 12y ago
School administrators, not teachers, are the elected crazies.
joeclark77 12y ago
The courts? Have a judge pick the textbook? I can't think of anything that could possibly go wrong. School choice is the solution. Let parents hold the schools accountable, because they're the only ones (apparently) who put the kids' education ahead of political pet causes.
- pavel_lishin 12y ago
  School choice may not be a viable option for lower income families, especially in non-urban settings.
  - refurb 12y ago
    It would be under a voucher system, but the teacher's union doesn't like that idea.
    - pavel_lishin 12y ago
      It's been awhile (high school) since I've read about voucher system; how do they work nowadays? Is there a way to cover transportation cost and time?
    - opendais 12y ago
      A voucher system that properly enabled children in poor neighborhoods (by covering the related costs) would be a good idea.
    - ironchef 12y ago
      It's not just the union as charter schools are (in general) just as mixed of a bag as public schools. There was a Stanford study back in 2009 that spanned 16 states and showed around 20 percent of charters outperformed and 35 percent of charters underperformed their peer public schools. Actually this reminds me they were supposed to have another round of outcomes last year or so. I'll have to go and see again how things have changed. (Offhand, it wouldn't surprise me if it's relatively close overall).
- rrss1122 12y ago
  That's why lawmakers often want a voucher system, to give the lower income students the power of school choice.
  - joeclark77 12y ago
    You don't have to sell me on the idea, brother, I've been supporting vouchers since I heard of them. I think you're overly optimistic that there are "lawmakers" on our side, though. Even those from the ostensibly free-market party, when they get into power, rarely support programs that would reduce their own sphere of influence. It's hard to get re-elected by saying "Look what I didn't do for you."
    - opendais 12y ago
      School choice only works if it is enough to cover all the external costs as well as all the tuition at a private school. No lawmaker and few citizens are willing to pay for that. ;)
      - glenra 12y ago
        The average private school costs quite a lot less than the average public school. You could spend about half as much per student and still get safer kids and happier parents. So what "external costs" are you thinking of? Going to a private school does involve travel, but so does going to your assigned public school. Depending on how the district lines are drawn and how centralized the district is, the trip might even be shorter.
        opendais 12y ago
        Source? When my ex girlfriend was shopping around for a private school the private schools in the area were both: A) More expensive (by about $3-5k/year) than what the local district spends. B) Were generally further and didn't provide a bus to pick the kids/drop them off at that distance.
        12y ago
roc 12y ago
> "I think the courts are a better solution for that problem." So who sues? The students who are under-served by a public education system that doesn't teach evolution? Let's suppose they find a jury of their peers that agrees, what does the court decision look like? A mandate for the hiring or retention of at least one teacher who will teach evolution? (Likely with redundancies. People retire, change jobs, get sick, etc.) And to ensure the ruling is respected one would imagine the district would have to go to further lengths to prove cause, if they ever want to remove that teacher, right? So all we'll have done is move the tenure track to the court docket, but only for those students/concerns that can shoulder the legal costs to pursue their rights, inevitably providing poorer service to poorer students and those seeking protections for minority concerns (which are disproportionately less likely to win a court case).

w1ntermute 12y ago

Sounds like the solution to that is to make it illegal to ban these topics (and then firmly enforce that law), rather than giving the teachers tenure.

opendais 12y ago
I think you've never experienced unofficial pressure in the workplace before when you need to put food on the table. ;) Tenure is much, much more effective than trying to make a law like that work reliably. Every time some new topic came up that was politically charged, you'd need to amend it. What happens when the people you consider to be the "wrong people" are in charge? They get their way.
- yellowapple 12y ago
  If it's unofficial, then there's not much to be worried about. Do your job and you'll be fine. I honestly don't think tenure is more effective than actual legal enforcement, namely because tenure isn't really effective for that purpose at all, especially when we're considering that the older teachers - the ones who benefit from tenure - are the ones who are probably in support of such pressure, which is more likely directed at the younger teachers, relatively fresh from college, who want their students to learn about the proper science they learned about in school but are afraid to do so when their paychecks are on the line.
Bud 12y ago
That's not even in the possible range of solutions. Remember that lawmakers and law enforcers in red states are actively hostile towards teaching science, never mind teaching anything at all about the body, such as sex education. It's not going to be made illegal, and such laws will not and would not be enforced in the areas in which this is a problem to begin with, i.e., Republican areas.
- w1ntermute 12y ago
  > Remember that lawmakers and law enforcers in red states are actively hostile towards teaching science, never mind teaching anything at all about the body, such as sex education. Then do it at the federal level. Fuck the troglodytes in the red states.

chamblin 12y ago

Isn't it just as, if not more, likely that a teacher would i.e. refuse to teach evolution (or even just be generally incompetent) and irremovable because of tenure? How does that improve anything?

opendais 12y ago
Ah, but that is a violation of the curriculum and clear cause for removal. Tenure isn't some magical invulnerability to being fired. It simply slows the process to a crawl and forces the collection of a mountain of evidence to fire someone for cause. If someone intentionally, and repeatedly, violates the curriculum you can fire a tenured teacher. You can't acquire that mountain of evidence in the 12 months between getting a ban on evolution passed and having it repealed in federal court.
- joeclark77 12y ago
  You just contradicted yourself. You're saying here that tenure cannot enable teachers to defy the school board.
  - opendais 12y ago
    I didn't actually. Tenure doesn't give them immunity to the school board and/or other administrators. It does last long enough that abuses of the system and/or unofficial pressure to be resolved before the teacher actually loses their job. Firing a teacher with tenure can take 12+ months. Clearer?
    - Variance 12y ago
      Joe is right, you did contradict yourself. You originally said that tenure allows teachers to violate stupid school board decisions and to teach evolution anyway. Here, you said that tenure does not allow teachers to not teach evolution if the school board mandates it. Which is it? Can the school board fire teachers for not following the curriculum? If so, then school boards can stop teachers from teaching evolution. If not, then teachers can choose to teach Creationism. Either way, tenure doesn't matter.

eastbayjake 12y ago

The freedom to teach unpopular ideas also includes the freedom to teach that water has feelings and you can change its molecular structure by yelling at it, or that vaccines cause autism, or that global warming is all a bunch of bullshit made up by the liberal media. Pick your poison.

opendais 12y ago
Please cite examples of this actually occurring and the teacher not being fired for 12+ months? I used the word immediate for a reason that seems to be lost on some people :/
- eastbayjake 12y ago
  No, I'm agreeing that a science teacher who taught kids that water has feelings would be fired immediately without tenure protections -- and deserves to be fired immediately! But tenure protections would not just protect an evolution teacher in Mississippi, it would also protect Gwyneth Paltrow's right to teach kids batshit crazy things about molecular chemistry based on new age pseudoscience. It cuts both ways.

ameister14 12y ago

You make a point in a later comment "Except a Creationist school district would be a violation of Church/State separation and the trial relating to that would stop the teacher from being fired." So tenure protects teachers long enough for such a trial to occur. I understand that. But wouldn't a wrongful termination suit do the same? After a couple of these, the State would pass guidelines on hiring and firing so that they don't get sued.