NEAT - info about SPPS budget:
http://tinyurl.com/3gt66
_________________________________________
 
 
Terry O�Brien Menke wrote:

�Many factors influence how well the budget dollars
impact the classroom. For example, rising health care
costs and an increase in the number of teachers high
on the salary scale are factors that impact whether
dollars make it into the classroom. What are the
factors, and how can they be controlled? How much
money is needed to facilitate a productive, engaged
learning experience for students?�

Thank-you Terry, for your well put questions. 

Teachers in District 625 are compensated according to
a system known as �Steps and Lanes�. That is (A.) How
long has the teacher been with the district (Steps)
and (B.) Whether the teacher has an undergraduate or
graduate degree (Lanes).

The problem with this system is easy to recognize.
First of all, the length of service really means
nothing more than how long a teacher has physically
been in a classroom and secondly the only thing that
any diploma absolutely guarantees with certainty is
that the recipient does not owe the issuing
institution any money. 

This system serves the interests of no one but the
union leadership and the mediocre, the jaded or the
inept few teachers who would be much better served in
another field altogether. 

It is the standard way blue collar factory workers
have been paid for decades, and it also serves to
exclude any possibility of rewarding excellence or
punishing incompetence because it inherently excludes
any qualitative measurement of performance.

The idea of �accountability�, as it is taken to mean
any qualitative measure of performance in a given task
is an anathema to teachers unions nationwide. This
fact is one that past board member Becky Montgomery is
now thoroughly familiar with.

Ms. Montgomery was a vocal supporter of Superintendent
Harvey�s attempt to instill real accountability (as
described above) into the district. During the next
election, the AFT removed it�s endorsement and
installed someone more to their liking. The fact that
it was Ms. Montgomery�s support of accountability that
cost her the election is widely known--SPFT made sure
of that. 

After the election, the first (and only) item on the
agenda for the first meeting of the board was to give
Superintendent Harvey a �new perspective� on what
constituted acceptable accountability according to the
Saint Paul Federation of Teachers. I was in attendance
at that meeting, as were SPFT President Ian Keith and
his three, new, union endorsed, board members
(although they had not yet been sworn in).

As a result of this show of force, Dr. Harvey agreed
to remove all aspects of enforcement and to
incorporate the type of cryptoclastic methods of
measurement that any failing school administrator or
teacher can easily hide behind. (Perhaps  the teeth
that were removed at that meeting were the ones Mr.
Oertwig installed in the districts �right to organize
policy� ;-)

How does this type of manipulation help the struggling
students of Dayton�s Bluff Elementary? Of course it
doesn�t.

But academic excellence is not a unions job! The SPFT
and every other teachers union in the country exist to
secure high paying jobs for their members and to fight
against any  measures that cast a shadow over them or
reduce their control over public education..period. 

But the unions are not to blame for the current state
of affairs in public education: WE ARE. We are the
one�s who continually vote for candidates who bear the
�union label�. We are the ones gullible enough to
believe that since a union has the words �Education�
or Teacher� in their names that they automatically
have our children�s best interest at heart. They
don�t!

Hey, don�t take my word for this. Here is what past
NEA President Robert Chase said during an address
entitled �Reinventing Teachers Unions for a New Era�
presented to the National Press Club in 1997:

�I campaigned for and was elected president of the NEA
to make a difference for children, by recreating--by
fundamentally recreating---NEA as the champion of
quality teaching and quality public schools in the
United States.�

�Bear in mind that, for nearly three decades now, the
NEA has been a traditional, somewhat narrowly focused
union. We have butted heads with management over
bread-and-butter issues--to win better salaries,
benefits, and working conditions for school employees.
And we have succeeded.�

�Today, however, it is clear to me--and to a critical
mass of teachers across America--that while this
narrow, traditional agenda remains important, it is
utterly inadequate to the needs of the future. It will
not serve our members� interest in greater
professionalism. It will not serve the public�s
interests in better quality public schools. And it
will not serve the interests of America�s children.�

�The fact is that, in some instances, we have used our
power to block uncomfortable changes--to protect the
narrow interests of our members, and not to advance
the interests of students and schools.�

As one might expect, these sentiments did not go over
well among the unions power brokers. Here is an
excerpt from a response signed by the eight presidents
and executive directors of NEA�s Wisconsin locals:



�What is most profoundly disturbing is your
acknowledgement that traditional industrial style
teachers unions have brought major improvements to
public education, and then to proceed to debauch these
accomplishments with the insight that it�s time to
create a new union. We are union and we are proud, we
stand in solidarity..�

�Members pay dues for us to promote their interests.
Why should we accept the responsibility for poor
teaching quality in light of inadequate teacher
preparation programs at schools of education..�

�We contrast your comments with the reinvigoration of
the AFL-CIO leadership accepting the challenge to
return to its roots, to organize and challenge
employers all over the United States. It�s time that
the NEA joins the labor movement, renews its
commitment to its members, and moves forward in its
quest on behalf of education employees across the
nation.�

What was Mr. Chase�s criminal plan for reinventing the
NEA? 

He wanted to create an association of PROFESSIONALS in
the mold of the American Medical Association. 

He believed that teachers would be better served if
the NEA insured high wages through an oversight
intended to maintain standards of excellence among the
teaching profession.

He wished the association might have a greater role in
the education that educator's recieve.

He has the audacity to suggest that it was not in the
best interest of the teachers or their students to
band together for nothing more than to argue with
school administrators and their employers: the
constituents of the districts--us.

Mr. Chase was a visionary, but for his reactionary
anti-trade union views he was also the owner of one of
the shortest NEA presidencies on record. 

The union power brokers evidently feel that teachers
are best served by treating them as unskilled
laborers--by keeping them under the belief that they
must not rely on their own skills and passion to be
rewarded. 

Teachers are led to believe that only by protecting
the weakest, the most inept in their ranks are their
jobs secure.

Next: What does all of this have to do with budget
shortfalls?

Tom Swift


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want.
http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools
_____________________________________________
SPPS Budget Reduction Forum - Feb. 23-27
Co-Sponsored By NEAT: http://www.stpaulneat.org/
_____________________________________________
NEW ADDRESS FOR LIST:     [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To subscribe, modify subscription, or get your password - visit:
http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/stpaul

Archive Address:
   http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/private/stpaul/

Reply via email to