You're viewing a single thread.
Teachers: "We're doing the best we can. It's all the parents' fault for raising these no-learning-ass little monsters. We've tried literally everything, and there is NOTHING WE COULD POSSIBLY DO to rescue the nation from this nightmare of continually stupider people. None of it is our fault, and if you even think about suggesting that we should be held accountable for our job performance, you are actually evil."
Also teachers: "If you kicked us an extra twenty or thirty grand per year, you'd really start to see a lot of improvement."
I mean, it is probably easier to teach when you have adequate funds for supplies, and are paid a wage where you don’t have to hold down an extra job to make ends meet, having more attention and energy for teaching. One would think at least
That's true. And I was exaggerating for effect. But the fact remains that you can't have it both ways.
Either you're doing everything that can be done, and nothing can help these little shits to learn OR you need more money, and that would fix the problem.
Pick one of those messages. Not both. Both things can't be true.
EDIT: Please do pick the "we need more money" message. It's actionable, at least. I'm all for raising taxes on the top 25 percent wealthy motherfuckers and putting a lot of that dough into education and directly into teachers' salaries.
We should at least try that. See if it works. The other message is just "the kids are dumb. The parents are bad. We're all screwed. Always kiss teachers' asses, though, whenever you see them."
Honestly, I don't think I've heard the former all that much, at least outside the context of the latter.
So yes, you can have it both ways because one influences the other. Provided you can see in more than one dimension.
Honestly, I don’t think I’ve heard the former all that much
I've usually heard it in the context of teachers bristling at any notion that they should be graded on the results that they achieve, in their jobs.
When someone suggests ANY level of accountability, based on outcomes, the teachers will start screaming and crying, about how there's nothing that they could do any differently, they're already doing their best, and nothing is their fault. So it would be incredibly unfair and downright villainous to even consider evaluating their job performance.
Well, if that's the case, then it shouldn't be possible to buy better results. ARE they holding back and underperforming, as a form of industrial action? If so, that's kind of a dick move, from the perspective of the kids that are being under-taught. Also, if that's what they're doing, then they need to be more direct in explaining the situation.
If they literally said "we COULD do better, but you pay us like shit, so we're not really trying. You get what you pay for," I would respect that.
But nobody wants to say that. They want to be regarded as valiant, heroic martyrs, constantly struggling to do their absolute best, but ALSO they would totally take that extra green, if someone offered it.
the teachers will start screaming and crying
You know, and I know this is completely anecdotal, but I don't think I've ever seen people use a description like that except when they're trying to dismiss the opinions of others. It puts the complaint on an emotional level rather than a rational one, as though it's not worth consideration.
One can also do their best, but still not be up to par simply because they don't have the resources available. If the teacher/student ratios are too high, so they can't address all issues necessary. If they don't have the physical resources available to provide adequate education, out-of-date or just poorly made textbooks, or the resources they do have are politicized to the degree that they can only teach misinformation without risking their job.
And I think our experience with standardization is a perfect example for why they might be reticent to accept evaluations as a way to determine effectiveness. If those evaluations don't take into account the previous things I mentioned, talented and capable teachers may get the axe through no fault of their own.
Not to mention... maybe you're just seeing a vocal minority. Of people who aren't capable and just don't want to lose their safe job. That doesn't necessarily reflect teachers as a whole.
And finally... while we are a capitalist society, and thus money is the (no longer) gold standard by which we measure success... just throwing money at something doesn't necessarily fix it. It needs to go hand in hand with proper procedures, regulations, and a flexibility of contextual awareness over global standardization. Yes, money will help, but it's no where near the only thing. It's just the easiest to look at and say "We did a thing!" and "The thing doesn't work, it's someone else's fault now!"
Yeah I think this person just dislikes educators
And is embarrassed they and/or their kids score poorly
If the teacher/student ratios are too high, so they can’t address all issues necessary. If they don’t have the physical resources available to provide adequate education, out-of-date or just poorly made textbooks, or the resources they do have are politicized to the degree that they can only teach misinformation without risking their job.
This is where the argument always shifts. But it STARTS with "I personally need a bigger salary."
And I don't even disagree. Teachers should be making at LEAST twice the money they make. Take the money from the fucking sports programs at the state colleges and funnel that shit directly to the workaday teachers. But I think it's weird that you try to wriggle away from the discussion about actual teacher pay. Be open about it. It seems weird, otherwise.
why they might be reticent to accept evaluations as a way to determine effectiveness
You mean like literally every other job? There are basically four jobs in modern, industrialized society, where you're able to skate by and never be evaluated on your effectiveness: cops, nurses, politicians, and teachers.
And all four of those groups are CONSTANTLY HANGING THEMSELVES UP ON THEIR CROSSES OF MARTYRDOM, BECAUSE "OOOOOHHH, NOOOOO, THE PEOPLE DON'T ACCEPT OUR EXCUSES FOR BEING SHITTY, EVEN WHEN WE'RE SHITTY!"
Not that we, the rest of the people, can actually DO anything about them being shitty. You can't get any of the people in those protected groups fired, for basically any performance-related reason.
As a person who has only ever been on the receiving end of nursing, law enforcement, politics, and teaching, believe me: I have encountered plenty of shitty people in all those professions. But none of the people who actually work in those categories are ever subjected to the kind of performance-based, results-based evaluations that all the rest of us simply have to expect, in our lives.
Every other job involves results-based performance reviews. If you get bad results, you can get demoted, get penalized, or get fired. Even if you have reasonable excuses for your failures. The only exception would be if you work for yourself. But then you're subject to the actual market. If you do a shitty job, people won't want to use your products or services.
But, again, if you're a cop, a nurse, a teacher, or a politician, you don't have to worry. As long as you play the politics correctly, your failures don't matter. You'll be shielded from them, as long as you're in good standing with your peers.
I'm not happy about that, and I don't think I should be.
Every other job involves results-based performance reviews. If you get bad results, you can get demoted, get penalized, or get fired.
And those metrics are also often bullshit made up by middle managers to make themselves look good.
I dont disagree that we should hold basic services like that to a higher standard... but especially with teachers (and nurses) they need a hell of a lot more support before its going to be an effective way to cull the whiners.
And just because you've had a few bad experiences doesn't mean that the entire professions are rotten to the core. Seems to me you're doing just as much bitching (probably more) as the people you're bitching about.
just because you’ve had a few bad experiences doesn’t mean that the entire professions are rotten to the core
Yeah, there are definitely good, bad, and medium-level performers in the group.
But, according to you, we shouldn't be making any attempts to evaluate them. You apparently just think I should treat them all the same, pretend the bad apples don't exist, and just continue to pay my taxes and keep my mouth shut, even though each generation of people gets stupider and stupider.
The kids who are about to graduate high school this year are mostly illiterate. No shit. They're just meat creatures, with smartphones attached to them. We're in the middle of a fucking emergency.
As for nurses, cops, and politicians, it's even more of a life and death situation, on a daily basis. On the nursing front, you've got actual anti-vaxx nurses, stalking the wards, pretending they know better than the doctors. Cops have been almost 100 percent radicalized to ultra-right-wing nonsense ideologies, and cruise around our neighborhoods, as if they're patrolling enemy territory. They shoot whoever they want, with total knowledge that they will be protected by ridiculous interpretations of federal law, as well as a ridiculously powerful union.
Politics is, like, unsolvable, at this point. I'm not even going to depress myself by talking about it.
The point is, I don't think anybody is above accountability for their fucking performance. Period. There really isn't an honest way for you to disagree with that. Even when you take factors like the district budget into account (grading on a curve, no pun intended), I still think you CAN asses all public employees, in a meaningful way. I agree, it shouldn't be anything like the meaningless performance reviews that middle managers come up with, to convince everyone that they're not useless parasites. But their ways are not the only ways.
You know who really gets it? The whole thing that I'm talking about? Firefighters. They get it.
Firefighters know that they better fucking put the fires out, or else they're gonna get fucking fired, lol. Never in your life are you going to hear about a fire department that actually sucks at their job. I don't know if the firefighters have a union, but I know they're not out there, defending fire stations who let whole blocks burn down, on their watch.
Thing is, people won't stand for that shit, and they know it. If shit starts burning down, and they can't stop it, they know the townspeople are NOT going to accept any excuses. That's largely because the fire is bright, loud, smelly, and happens in less than one day. It can't be ignored, and you know EXACTLY who didn't solve that problem.
In terms of the education crisis, the whole goddamn country is on fire. But you can't SEE the fire. The ashes won't be revealed until years later, when the slower-moving consequences of bad education start rippling through society. ALL of us will suffer for it. But nah, you keep worrying about the poor, poor, put-upon, heroic martyr teachers, who can do no wrong. I'm sure they would give you a thumbs-up for your solidarity, if they saw this conversation.
Both can be true. Teachers can be doing everything they humanly can with the constraints and budgets they're given by the people in charge, whether it is public or private schools. They're still people who need food, water, shelter and clothing, and so many teachers pay for the supplies they need with their own money, cutting into their ability to afford basic necessities.
Having more money available to pay for teacher's aides, and for the necessary supplies would remove a lot of the burden and barriers teachers face when actually teaching.
many teachers pay for the supplies they need with their own money
They just shouldn't do that. It should be actually illegal to do that. I really mean that.
Imagine if this shit was going on, in the construction industry. Imagine if we got into a situation, where the people who hire construction contractors refused to pay for enough building materials, and then the contractors refused to pay for those materials, and then the actual construction workers started bringing in steel and concrete, from home.
That would be BEYOND STUPID. Nobody would do that. But if they DID ever do that, it would completely destroy the economy, and basically make sure that no buildings could ever be built or repaired.
Rather than telling the people at large that they need their asses kissed, the response should be to tell the districts: "well, I ran out of supplies, so I couldn't teach." If that functionally means a strike, then so be it. It is ethically problematic, because of the actual futures of the actual kids involved...but it should have been dealt with sharply and directly, all along.
Instead, teachers are coddling governments and middle managers by taking the burden onto themselves. I know it's easier said than done, but they need to start saying "no," rather than saying "please help me, out of the kindness of your hearts."
Then the children would get worse education than they already get, it would be years until the pressure got enough to actually change anything in the administration, and then longer for it to have any effect on the funding that schools recieve from the government.
It's not some problem that can just be hand waved away because they should have handled it better in the first place or something. This shit has measurable effects on outcomes for the rest of a person's life.
The issue is that the consequences of any strong action from the teachers disproportionally effects the students, with little to no direct effect on the people that would need to be involved with improving the situation.
But sure, go off on how teachers are failing students by stretching themselves thin trying to keep students from being screwed over.
Same shit as telling schools to stop blowing absurd amounts of money on sports: it's not nearly so simple. A lot of that money comes to the schools in ways (grants, etc) that legally obligates them to use it for sports and not where it would be more effective.
But no, the true reason things suck couldn't possibly be because shit is fucking complicated. Everyone is just too dumb or cowardly to do things the way you identified as the solution.
I sincerely hope you grow to understand that most shit like this wouldn't be a problem in the first place if any old layperson's "hot take" idea could actually solve it. People are stupid, but not that fucking stupid.
It’s not some problem that can just be hand waved away because they should have handled it better in the first place or something
Nah, I think it was EXACTLY like that. That's where I was going, with my analogy about the construction industry. If the construction workers started being asked to bring in concrete and steel for the jobs, out of their own pay, THEY WOULD BE INCREDIBLY STUPID TO START DOING IT.
They should refuse, immediately. They should absolutely nip that shit in the bud. Never give it any chance to become a massive problem.
Imagine if every teacher had said "nope, we don't do that," the first time they didn't have enough supplies in their classrooms, and someone started making throat-clearing noises, implying that they could just bring that shit from home. If they had all showed solidarity with each other, from the start, things would be very different.
Now, of course, the practices are ingrained. It has been normalized.
It WAS a mistake for teachers to allow that shit. The problem is massively more difficult to solve, now.