Politics & Current Events
Dear Community,
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Chicago Teachers Strike
Thoughts?
I think in the current educational climate, expecting a total of 16% raise (4% over 4 years) is absolutely unreasonable. We are on a freeze right now for the second time in 10 years. Schools in our area are getting 1% pay raises if they're lucky, and only over the course of 2 or 3 years.
I cannot speak to the other reforms, but I know that their day was so short to begin with, so the "increased pay for more work" argument that would usually hold may not in this case. I read that they are working a full hour or so less than the majority of teachers. I also saw the average teacher salary, which is over 20 grand more than I am making now.
"I want the left to know they screwed with the wrong guy."
-This signature may or may not have been selectively edited.
Re: Chicago Teachers Strike
Here's an interesting article with the rationale for the strike. It includes the 4% raise over 4 years that I mentioned before. I am sure that schools may have gotten it, but I have never known a school district get a 4% raise for one year, let alone 4. The average salary cited is approximately $74,000.
In our state, they're working on an evaluation plan where it's half scores, half evaluations. If you get below two standard deviations (compared to other schools in the state, you can be rated "ineffective."
http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/10/us/illinois-chicago-teachers-strike/index.html
CNN) -- Chicago teachers and administrators started talking again Monday, hours after the educators' union called a strike and school officials said they had nothing left to give.
Public school teachers launched their first strike in the city in 25 years Sunday night, saying they were close to a deal on pay but far apart on teacher evaluations, benefits and other issues.
The strike left about 350,000 students with an unscheduled day off, and left some parents scrambling for alternatives.
The school district opened 144 of its 578 schools for part of the day to provide a safe environment and meals to children in need. Dozens of churches and civic organizations stepped in to provide activities for the thousands of suddenly idle students. And police, expecting an uptick in trouble with more kids on the streets, pulled officers from desk duty to increase patrols.
The union that represents nearly 30,000 teachers and support staff in the nation's third-largest school district called the strike after negotiators failed to reach a contract agreement with school administrators despite 10 months of talks.
Mayor Rahm Emanuel said teachers were harming Chicago's children by striking.
"This is in my view a strike of choice, and it's the wrong choice for our children," he said. "Stay at the table. Finish it for our children."
He said negotiators had resolved all but two issues -- teacher evaluations and provisions dealing with jobs for laid-off teachers.
However, Chicago Teachers Union President Karen Lewis said teachers had no choice but to strike, despite "intense but productive" bargaining sessions.
The primary disagreement appears to be teacher job security in the wake of a new program that evaluates teachers based on students' standardized test scores. Chicago Teachers Union board member Jay Rehak called the idea "data-driven madness."
As many as 6,000 teachers could lose their jobs under the evaluation system, according to Lewis, who called the system "unacceptable."
"This is no way to measure the effectiveness of an educator," she said Sunday. "Further, there are too many factors beyond our control which impact how well some students perform on standardized tests such as poverty, exposure to violence, homelessness, hunger and other social issues beyond our control."
Another sticking point is a "recall" policy that would put laid-off teachers in line for job openings at other schools within the district. Emanuel said such a policy, supported by the union, would take hiring decisions away from school principals and put them in the hands of central administrators and union leaders.
"Direction and dictation should not come out of downtown," the mayor said.
Teachers also want to block changes to their health benefits and win concessions on classroom conditions.
Pay is also an issue. However, the union said the two sides are close to a pay agreement after school officials offered a deal that would increase salaries 16% over four years. The average teacher salary in Chicago was $74,839 for the 2011-2012 school year, according to the district.
In addition to the pay increase, the offer includes paid maternity leave and short-term disability coverage. It would also freeze health care cost increases for two-thirds of the union's membership.
The high school day would also be shortened slightly, and teachers would be limited to teaching five classes, the district said.
The district's existing proposal would cost $400 million over four years, according to school board President David Vitale.
Key issues in Chicago school strike
Chicago schools can't afford more concessions, Vitale said. "We have no more flexibility when it comes to finance," he told CNN on Monday.
At a midday news conference, Emanuel called the plan on the table an "honest compromise that respects our teachers, does right by our kids and is fair to our taxpayers."
Union officials have said they are puzzled by the stance of Emanuel, the city's Democratic mayor, whom they accused of going back on promises to teachers, police officers and other civil servants, according to teachers union board member Jay Rehak.
"He has definitely been a huge disappointment," Rehak said. "He has disrespected virtually every middle-class person in this city."
Sen. *** Durbin, D-Illinois, said he had no solution for the crisis but urged a quick resolution.
"Both sides need to get back to the table as quickly as possible and really stay in there, negotiate through the night if necessary," he said Monday. "Get it over with quickly so that we can get these kids back in school."
Read more about teacher unions on CNN's Schools of Thought blog
About 50,000 Chicago students who attend charter schools are unaffected by the strike and will remain in class.
While keeping 144 of its schools open to provide a haven for part of the day, the school district urged parents "to first explore other options for their children."
"We know that a strike will put a strain on many families, and no one will be hurt more by a strike than our students," the district said on its website.
One of the organizations opening doors for students during the strike is Young Chicago Authors, which has a free program for part of the day for students in grades six through 12.
"In collaboration with core performance artists and special guests, young people will see the power of their voices in action through film, performance and discussion," the group said.
Still, some parents were concerned about what would happen to their children during the strike.
"If the kids are not in school, they're out getting into some kind of trouble ... when they should be in school, learning," said Shatara Scaggs, the mother of two children in kindergarten and first grade. "I think they should be in school getting an education. I don't think the teachers should be on strike."
Are you there? Share your images and videos.
Honestly, I don't know much about the specifics and I don't want to blindly support a union just because it's a union. Do you have a good summary site?
Things like when they got their last raise, changes in benefits, raises for administrators, the area's cost of living, etc really matter to me. A 16% increase isn't necessarily an increase. For instance, my husbands union was offered a raise - that was immediately cancelled out by hikes in cost of health insurance. --That's not necessarily a defense of CPS, just trying to point out that there are additional considerations.
ETA: Just saw you posted something while I was typing. Stupid work is getting in the way of efficient web browsing.
I think that the teacher evaluation reforms are quickly becoming the way of the world----half on principal evaluations, half on test scores. It's worrisome when you have a low group, but I actually don't mind this because the test scores are cut and dried. It's quantitative. I'd have more of a chance at being shafted by a principal in qualitative, subjective evaluations than I would by the test scores. We're compared to schools across the state, not from class to class, thank goodness. (Our predecessors always have sky-high scores.)
I'm not in the "in crowd" so I'd be in trouble if the principal had to do a bell curve or something like that on evaluations, but principals at least in our state are going to be judged based on themselves, their teachers, and students, so they have a vested interest in scoring you at least highly enough so that you won't be branded "ineffective."
What I think is too far is like in Louisiana, where one bad group and you get branded "ineffective" and lose tenure unless you have four or five, maybe even six, good classes in a row, which might never occur.
Here's a pro-union piece about why they asked for more pay. I think that the "more pay for more work" goes astray when they have an unreasonably short work day to begin with. I mean their particular work day, not teacher work days in general.
http://bluedownstate.wordpress.com/2012/09/09/why-chicago-teachers-are-asking-for-a-large-pay-raise/
Here's another piece.
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/b-cs-chicago-teacher-strike-evaluation-system-looms-201903517.html
I do worry about principals dumping all the worst students on one teacher, then firing... it should be based over a course of years and lack of improvement. I still can't believe they wanted a 29% pay increase to begin with. It's like they hardly work at all, so anything that's added is a huge increase of time, so they want a huge increase to work the NORMAL amount of time.
http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=news/politics&id=8076059
This piece states that the workday is between 5.5 and 6.5 hours. At our school, we have a 7.5 hour workday. (approx.)
what exactly constitutes your workday? I mean does it mean from the second you walk in the door until the last second you leave or is it more like: students arrive at 7:30am but if you are not allowed to leave your room unattended with students in it so you get there at 7am to deal with early birds and to prepare but technically your workday starts at 7:30? Does it include lunch/planning periods or do they consider that "your time" vs. part of your required workday?
I think the issue here is really with the evaluation procedure, not the pay or hours. I don't support evaluating teachers solely on test scores, because like many previous posters have mentioned, you could get one bad group of students. Or, like has happened to me, there are some students that will not be motivated no matter how much you try. I teach teenagers, and it's just a hard group overall, especially if they're coming from a family or school where no one has believed in them before. But I'm getting off topic now...
Basically, there needs to be a several year long bit of data showing that a certain teacher's students don't measure up, in my opinion. BUT, going completely the other way (qualitative evaluation) is a problem too, as it leaves ineffective teachers in positions because of tenure.
Really...I would just like a full time job instead of having to sub because my state can't figure it out either. Teaching jobs are scarce here. I'll take whatever I can get.
my read shelf:
I think that the era of keeping teachers based on number of years alone is over. A lot of states are moving to the test scores/principal evaluation model, so at least there's a check and balance. There needs to be a mechanism for fairness, though, where guidance counselors adequately divide up the good, average, and below average students so that one teacher isn't loaded with the best while another is bogged down. I know at our school I had the majority of great students last year, but now this year I have a lower proportion. They try to even it out, but I am sure that does not happen across the board.
Sorry, there's no way to explain away a 5.5 to 6.5 workday. That 5.5 hour figure is just crazy. What do they do for the rest of the time? What burns me is that they barely work, then when it's proposed that they have a longer work day, it appears like a bigger percentage of the day, so they want a huge pay increase when actually they're working a normal day that everybody else doesn't get a 29% increase for. I don't think it's too much to ask that public employees on a defined benefit pension work more than 6.5 hours a day. I go to school early each day, and it ends up being 8 hours.
The average teacher salary is approximately 74 thousand, and the income for the area is 47 thousand, for the person who asked about it. I know that there's a problem with kids coming to school with no skills and horrible background, but I think they're trying to take too big a bite out of the apple.
I live in the Chicago suburbs so the news coverage is all about the strike. The teachers were supposed to get a four percent raise last year, but somehow Rahm Emmanuel just cancelled that even though it was in their last contract and then pushed for the longer school day. So the teachers were pissed to begin with.
On Sunday I kept hearing that they agreed on 3% raises for the first year, and two percent raises for the next three years. But now they keep saying 16% over four years so I'm not sure what numbers are correct. Before the longer day, Chicago had one of the shortest school days anywhere.
There has been lots of talk about the evaluation process and I just heard the school board president talking about how the state has new laws on teacher evaluation And there isn't much they can do to change it. Knowing the way IL works, the rules aren't set yet and the teachers are worried about what the final rules will say.
They also want a timeline for getting air conditioning in the schools. I've worked in the schools as an environmental consultant and putting air conditioning in will cost millions and millions of dollars because of the asbestos and lead issues.
My friend who works for the CPS, just said this...
Yes, Chicago teachers are on strike, but why is the media not telling the whole story? 47 kids in a class is unacceptable and should not be allowed. 1,000 students per social worker is ridiculous and an injustice. Tying teacher salary to tests that are not aligned to the curriculum creates a harmful learning environment where teachers are forced to teach to the tests. What is decided in this strike will affect how schools around the country are run. These reminders are important. Teaching is important. A fair contract keeps high quality teachers in a profession that so desperately needs them.
And she posted this article...
http://leanforward.msnbc.com/_news/2012/09/10/13789008-chicago-teacher-strike-was-rahms-choice-not-ours#.UE6byt_jqfU.twitter
If this is the case then the issue is not needing raises or evaluations, it's budgeting for more teachers. If they get raises it seems as if this will only make the issue worse as there will be less room in the budget for more teachers and other desperately needed staff. The case laid out is that this is unmanageable. It doesn't suddenly become manageable at 16-29% more in salary per year. The kids are still getting screwed.
Chicago is broke and very corrupt.
With that said, if Chicago wants to keep quality teachers in their schools, then they need to figure something out.
My friend just moved from a very wealthy suburb where the first graders were all getting iPads. In CPS, they barely have enough books to go around.
I do agree that the kids are suffering, but you have to remember that teaching is a job and they deserve proper trreatment.
I know nothing about Chicago, I can only speak as a spouse to a former inner-city school teacher.
That said, I'm taking the 4% for 4 years with a grain of salt. In DH's experience, there was no trust between the school board/leaders and the teachers. Case in point:
Teachers: Hey, class sizes are getting larger, conditions are getting worse. How about a 5% raise?
Board: Actually, we have no money. How does an across the board 30% pay cut and raising your health premiums to 20% sound?
After coming *thisclose* to striking, the result: a 1% pay raise, 3% health premium hike. In other words, each side stated their wish list as a demand to see if the other side would blink. If the Chicago leadership is anything similar, there is no love lost between the unions and the administration. I won't believe any numbers either side is touting--it's all posturing. I hope a deal gets done quickly for all involved.