What is a re-hire pool for laid off teachers? If you are laid off why shouldnt the administration have discretion on whether they want to hire someone back?
Some teachers aren't laid off for merit reasons. They could be casualties of budget cutting methods.
It depends. Here they've been experimenting with student evals. That can definitely be strike worthy. If your job security is in the hands of a 7th grader with a grudge, wouldn't you be concerned about that?
It's not student evaluations.
It does include student performance on standardized tests, which I'm not sure how I feel about. I'm trying to find more information about it though. IIRC, it's a company that we've retained to conduct the evaluations or at last come up with the criteria for evaluations. And it's objective, third party stuff. Not student comments.
Oh. Then what's the fuss about? If you're a good teacher, then you have nothing to worry about, right?
It does include student performance on standardized tests, which I'm not sure how I feel about. I'm trying to find more information about it though. IIRC, it's a company that we've retained to conduct the evaluations or at last come up with the criteria for evaluations. And it's objective, third party stuff. Not student comments.
Oh. Then what's the fuss about? If you're a good teacher, then you have nothing to worry about, right?
I'd like to think so, but I vaguely recall DH (an NYC public school teacher) mentioning a valid reason for not just saying, "Well, I'm a good teacher so I've got nothing to worry about." Dammit, wish I could remember and he'll be home late tonight.
So do they not want to be evaluated at all or do they want evaluations to include/exclude certain criteria?
Post by runforrest on Sept 10, 2012 12:08:18 GMT -5
Okay, maybe I'm just dense, but I don't understand the correlation between poor test scores and kids living in poverty:
"Emanuel said two main issues remain to be resolved: his proposal that teachers be evaluated based in part on student performance on standardized tests, and more authority for school principals. But union President Karen Lewis, who has sharply criticized Emanuel, said standardized tests do not take into account the poverty in inner city Chicago as well as hunger and violence in the streets. More than 80 percent of Chicago students qualify for free lunches because they come from low-income households, and Chicago students have performed poorly compared with national averages on most reading, math and science tests. Union officials said more than a quarter of Chicago public school teachers could lose their jobs if they are evaluated based on the tests. "Evaluate us on what we do, not the lives of our children we do not control," Lewis said in announcing the strike."
Is it because they aren't as likely to study for the standardized tests at home as those kids that don't live in poverty? I'm just not sure what she means by the above point.
This may have been addresses already, but this is yet another result of the stupid RTTT grant. A grant set on redoing teacher evaluations. I just can't today...I will leave choice words and comments on Duncan for another day
This may have been addresses already, but this is yet another result of the stupid RTTT grant. A grant set on redoing teacher evaluations. I just can't today...I will leave choice words and comments on Duncan for another day
Tef - you must be in my head. If I'm a GOP strategist, I'd jump up and down in glee. I'm still pouring over this whole thing trying to figure out where evals are in this whole mess. But, SBP said they aren't really the issue, but the media says they are. Hmmm.
They are totally the issue unless Illinois is nothing like my state (fat chance) and the union is against this type of evaluation. But, okay, I'll buy it (not). This is not to sbp....just the story.
Plus, privatization is probably the result of either a) poor schools or b) lack of funding to fund current schools,especially due to a changing population. Is chicago growing ore shrinking?
They are totally the issue unless Illinois is nothing like my state (fat chance) and the union is against this type of evaluation. But, okay, I'll buy it (not). This is not to sbp....just the story.
I bet there is something to it. But, I can't find anything that breaks down what the eval system looks like. I know we've had some discussions on teacher eval at the state level, but nothing has changed thus far. I think they are going to tackle it in the upcoming legislative session.
Wha - So hold up, wait a minute. So, the CTU, has no formal eval plan in writing? So, they are just objecting to doing any sort of eval plan? Did they have specific reasons for not wanting to do any of the plans presented? *sits back in chair for answers*
Post by runforrest on Sept 10, 2012 14:52:43 GMT -5
incogneato - damn. That sounds awful. I was assuming that having a third party compile or do the evals would be more accurate than a bunch of students, but maybe not. I haven't been able to find any concrete information about who is doing the evals, what they consist of, etc. etc., so I'm really flying blind.
I can't imagine being a teacher in CPS. Our kids would go to Taft for high school and it scares the bejebus out of me. We are fortunate in that we will be able to move into a better district or send the kids to private school, but obviously there are so many kids that don't have that option, and that don't have parents/guardians at home that give a damn. It's unreal. However, it sucks that striking is the answer because it puts the kids who do want to better their situation in a really shitty place.
I'm just saying I don't get the big deal. If you are still getting your pay and benefits, but just haven't agreed to changes in the contract, then I think it's no big deal to keep working,
Now if they don't pay you until your new contract, then that's not a strike. That's just not working because you aren't getting paid.
I'm torn about teachers striking - it tends to happen every 8-10 years in some form in Ontario, where teachers are paid well (avg elementary is about $60k, can range from 38-85 depending on time of service, qualifications, etc) and of course they do have about 8-10 weeks of holidays including summer, Christmas, march break. Plus Stat holidays off. And FABULOUS pensions here (Dh is a financial planner, and he has found the average person needs to independently save about $1M to match what is publicly contributed to an individual teachers pension) - he's figured this out with clients where one spouse is a teacher, the other not.
That being said - I think that often times teachers are given oversized classrooms, expected to extra-curriculars, and have to deal with ridiculous curriculum changes and things like evals that may be questionably fair. I don't think its fair to say 'you can't strike!" when there are legimate concerns teachers are trying to address. However, it certainly is NOT fair to the students, who are often used as pawns as far as negotiations go.
All jobs have perks and disadvantages. I do find that my friends who are teachers tend to cry foul for things that a private sector job would consider normal. BUT they also spend many hours outside of the classroom when most people leave their work at their desk at 5pm, kwim?
I'm just saying I don't get the big deal. If you are still getting your pay and benefits, but just haven't agreed to changes in the contract, then I think it's no big deal to keep working,
Now if they don't pay you until your new contract, then that's not a strike. That's just not working because you aren't getting paid.
well, payment is only one aspect of your job. If you don't know how you're going to be evaluated on your job, that's a problem. If you don't know that you want to continue working for a place with because you don't know what contract you're agreeing to when you get hired / for the rest of that school year, that's a problem. There are pretty legit beefs with not having a conract.
Usually the old contract (everythingn in it) remains in effect for atleast one school year.
Ya'll, I seriously have 6 web tabs open on this CPS Union Strike, and STILL haven't found anything indicating what the deal is with the teacher evaluation piece.
Voodoo, you aren't agreeing to a new contract until you sign that new contract. You are agreeing to the old contract....which you already said is fine and dandy last year.
I find the lack of responses to my pretty legitimate questions to be... telling?? But maybe I'm reading too much into that.
I also find it telling that CPS teacher have not had a strike in 25 years despite some pretty tough salary, class room size, hours, funding, and pension disputes. But what gets them out? A proposal for performance evaluations.
SBP - from what I've read (I've spent all day on this as an assignment anyway), but I don't think the real issue is the evaluation. The real issue is the pay. I think evals are getting lumped in with it.
The school day looks to be extended, you get some new teachers hired from the pool of laid of employees, but the hang up is the cost of the salary increase.
An independent report states they should get between 15-20%. Rahm offered them 16%. The eval piece is largely overlooked in the articles I'm reading.
These two seem to be the most complete sources of info:
I feel like if you are a good teacher, then why should you be against evals/merit pay? That's how most jobs work - if you do well, you are paid/rewarded, and if you don't, then you don't get raises or are fired. I don't see why teachers should be treated any differently.
I'm a teacher (granted, at a private school/company) near Chicago. I think the problem a lot of teachers have with merit pay is that it is often based on standardized test results, which most teachers don't consider an accurate assessment of an educator's performance (since there are so many factors/variables outside of the teacher's control). I don't like the idea of merit pay based on test results, but I do think there should be a rigorous evaluation process, just like there is within private companies. I don't think public school teachers should be exempt from such standards/expectations. I also don't think teachers should be able to strike.
I feel like if you are a good teacher, then why should you be against evals/merit pay? That's how most jobs work - if you do well, you are paid/rewarded, and if you don't, then you don't get raises or are fired. I don't see why teachers should be treated any differently.
I'm a teacher (granted, at a private school/company) near Chicago. I think the problem a lot of teachers have with merit pay is that it is often based on standardized test results, which most teachers don't consider an accurate assessment of an educator's performance (since there are so many factors/variables outside of the teacher's control). I don't like the idea of merit pay based on test results, but I do think there should be a rigorous evaluation process, just like there is within private companies. I don't think public school teachers should be exempt from such standards/expectations. I also don't think teachers should be able to strike.
I agree with you there. I don't think being judge solely or largely on standardized test scores is accurate. Some kids are smart but just don't test well.
I feel like if you are a good teacher, then why should you be against evals/merit pay? That's how most jobs work - if you do well, you are paid/rewarded, and if you don't, then you don't get raises or are fired. I don't see why teachers should be treated any differently.
I'm a teacher (granted, at a private school/company) near Chicago. I think the problem a lot of teachers have with merit pay is that it is often based on standardized test results, which most teachers don't consider an accurate assessment of an educator's performance (since there are so many factors/variables outside of the teacher's control). I don't like the idea of merit pay based on test results, but I do think there should be a rigorous evaluation process, just like there is within private companies. I don't think public school teachers should be exempt from such standards/expectations. I also don't think teachers should be able to strike.
Do you know what the proposed Eval system would look like or is there a link somewhere to it?
I'm a teacher (granted, at a private school/company) near Chicago. I think the problem a lot of teachers have with merit pay is that it is often based on standardized test results, which most teachers don't consider an accurate assessment of an educator's performance (since there are so many factors/variables outside of the teacher's control). I don't like the idea of merit pay based on test results, but I do think there should be a rigorous evaluation process, just like there is within private companies. I don't think public school teachers should be exempt from such standards/expectations. I also don't think teachers should be able to strike.
Do you know what the proposed Eval system would look like or is there a link somewhere to it?
I haven't heard or seen anything official since I don't work within that system. I will ask my teacher friend (she used to work for CPS), who is following the story closely, and try to post something tomorrow.
Post by noonecareswhoiam on Sept 10, 2012 16:44:45 GMT -5
Nitaw--you might want to also look at www.substancenews.net (which is strongly CTU-leaning), and Catalyst (www.catalyst-chicago.org).
Rahm's 16 percent also includes steps and lanes. And there's (or there was as of last night) nothing in writing.
My understanding is that the evaluation system has not been outlined, but will rely heavily on standardized tests like REACH.
Most of the teachers I know would be fine with evaluations if they were used to inform meaningful PD. But the standardized test-based evaluations correlate with teacher performance about as closely as would a system of randomly assigned evaluations (as in, there is no statistical significance).
Seriously-when you are forced to give the ACT to a student with an IQ of 60, placing your career's future in the No. 2 pencil of that student isn't a very compelling premise.
Nitaw--you might want to also look at www.substancenews.net (which is strongly CTU-leaning), and Catalyst (www.catalyst-chicago.org).
Rahm's 16 percent also includes steps and lanes. And there's (or there was as of last night) nothing in writing.
My understanding is that the evaluation system has not been outlined, but will rely heavily on standardized tests like REACH.
Most of the teachers I know would be fine with evaluations if they were used to inform meaningful PD. But the standardized test-based evaluations correlate with teacher performance about as closely as would a system of randomly assigned evaluations (as in, there is no statistical significance).
Seriously-when you are forced to give the ACT to a student with an IQ of 60, placing your career's future in the No. 2 pencil of that student isn't a very compelling premise.
Okay, maybe I'm just dense, but I don't understand the correlation between poor test scores and kids living in poverty:
"Emanuel said two main issues remain to be resolved: his proposal that teachers be evaluated based in part on student performance on standardized tests, and more authority for school principals. But union President Karen Lewis, who has sharply criticized Emanuel, said standardized tests do not take into account the poverty in inner city Chicago as well as hunger and violence in the streets. More than 80 percent of Chicago students qualify for free lunches because they come from low-income households, and Chicago students have performed poorly compared with national averages on most reading, math and science tests. Union officials said more than a quarter of Chicago public school teachers could lose their jobs if they are evaluated based on the tests. "Evaluate us on what we do, not the lives of our children we do not control," Lewis said in announcing the strike."
Is it because they aren't as likely to study for the standardized tests at home as those kids that don't live in poverty? I'm just not sure what she means by the above point.
I haven't seen anybody reply to this, so I'm sorry if I am covering things that have already been said.
Many of these kids live in poverty because their parents are not educated beyond a HS level (if that). Many of them have very little stability at home. They live in neighborhoods that experience violence daily.
The murder rate in Chicago is up almost 30% this year, over last year.
Parents are uneducated, poor, and unable to help/support their kids to the level that kids need to be helped and supported at. When the parent's aren't around, the kids find companionship and protect and support from "Friends" which is why we have a huge gang issue in Chicago as well.
Children come to school at 7:30 a.m. and have breakfast provided by the school. Then they leave at 3:30 p.m. after having had lunch. It's not at all a given that those kids eat again after their school-provided lunch. They may or may not have a home to go home to. Their parents may or may not be home after school.
Living in a gang ridden, violence dominated neighborhood is hard on anybody - especially kids. Of course a hectic, insecure, poverty stricken home life play a huge role in academic success. Just like coming from a privileged, upper class, two parents, white picket fence home life has an impact.
Post by basilosaurus on Sept 10, 2012 17:30:29 GMT -5
Much of this is beyond my understanding/knowledge base, but student evals have been implemented in a few Hawaii schools. However, they haven't said yet how they're going to use those assessments. If I were a teacher, I'd be pissed that some 4th grader could affect my retention and pay, but I'd be even more pissed at the uncertainty.
Ya'll, I seriously have 6 web tabs open on this CPS Union Strike, and STILL haven't found anything indicating what the deal is with the teacher evaluation piece.
What the deal is or if it is a cause of this? NPR did a piece today on it