If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Chicago Sun-Times)   Very liberal movie critic Roger Ebert after viewing "Waiting for Superman" agrees that teacher unions are destroying our education system. Why does he hate teachers?   (rogerebert.suntimes.com) divider line 229
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

2319 clicks; posted to Politics » on 08 Oct 2010 at 1:10 PM (3 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



229 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2010-10-08 10:23:38 AM
better question: why do teacher unions hate america?
 
2010-10-08 10:28:39 AM
Biness: better question: why do teacher unions hate america?

better better question: why do teahcer unions hate teachers?
 
2010-10-08 10:30:52 AM
SushiJoe: better better question: why do teahcer unions hate teachers?

best better question: why do teacher unions hate children?
 
2010-10-08 10:30:55 AM
Better better bestest question: Why didn't subby RTFA?
 
2010-10-08 10:31:35 AM
wolvernova: SushiJoe: better better question: why do teahcer unions hate teachers?

best better question: why do teacher unions hate children?


Butter question: salted or unsalted?
 
2010-10-08 10:35:11 AM
None of these are hair questions.
 
2010-10-08 10:41:48 AM
wolvernova: SushiJoe: better better question: why do teahcer unions hate teachers?

best better question: why do teacher unions hate children?


and of course, the squirrels
 
2010-10-08 10:45:21 AM
There is no one problem with our Education system, there's a whole slew of them. I'll name some for you.


1. There's a shortage of educated and dedicated teachers. It takes time to train a good teacher, most people who become teachers leave after the first few years for many reasons; low pay, high demand for work, little support, overworked, etc etc. We need to be encouraging more of our best and brightest to go into teaching.

2. Overcrowded classrooms. You can have one of the best teachers in the world, but they're not going to be able to do much more then babysit and drill kids when there's 30-40 kids in each class and they are teaching 5-6 classes a day.

3. Streamlined education. We are currently trying to have every kid learn the same thing, the same way. That doesn't work. Each child learns differently and right now they can't get the attention they need to differentiate what that methods are.

4. More money going into education, but less of it going to the actual classes. School systems are becoming way to top heavy. There are getting way to many administrators getting paid way too much compared to the amount of teachers.



Want to make our schools better? Here's how.

1. More teachers teaching less students. There shouldn't be more then 15, maybe 20 students to a class. This lets teachers actually teach kids instead of being up front trying to drill instruct them. It will let teachers focus on the kids that need more attention.

2. Bring back other subjects that we've been cutting back on. Yes, we all need math, science, and English, but you are not gonna get kids to love school by just teaching that. Bring back the other subjects to get kids hooked on learning.

3. Learn that not every child is college material. Instead of forcing them all to take classes as such, offer more programs that teach real world job skills. More technical focused learning for those who want it.
 
2010-10-08 10:50:38 AM
Bunnyhat: Want to make our schools better? Here's how.

1. More teachers teaching less students. There shouldn't be more then 15, maybe 20 students to a class. This lets teachers actually teach kids instead of being up front trying to drill instruct them. It will let teachers focus on the kids that need more attention.

2. Bring back other subjects that we've been cutting back on. Yes, we all need math, science, and English, but you are not gonna get kids to love school by just teaching that. Bring back the other subjects to get kids hooked on learning.

3. Learn that not every child is college material. Instead of forcing them all to take classes as such, offer more programs that teach real world job skills. More technical focused learning for those who want it.


Allow for teachers to be rated, the worst to be fired and the poor performers to be trained.
 
2010-10-08 10:51:48 AM
One problem with most schools, Guggenheim says, is that after teachers gain tenure in two years, it is almost impossible to fire them. In Illinois, for example, one out of 57 doctors loses his medical license, but only one in 2,500 teachers is fired. Some teachers flatly inform their students they have no intention of teaching.

My god. Why is this kind of thing tolerated?
 
2010-10-08 10:53:04 AM
Nabb1: One problem with most schools, Guggenheim says, is that after teachers gain tenure in two years, it is almost impossible to fire them. In Illinois, for example, one out of 57 doctors loses his medical license, but only one in 2,500 teachers is fired. Some teachers flatly inform their students they have no intention of teaching.

My god. Why is this kind of thing tolerated?


bureaucrats.
 
2010-10-08 10:57:49 AM
One point I do not see being made here is parental involvement. All of the children picked by the lottery and sent to a charter school have a parent willing to take time out and doing something to help. I taught one semester, trying help the world and there was a woman involved, just getting a parent to help was almost impossible.

Overreaching by government and unfounded expectations of what a teacher should do mix to make a large batch of Fail. I taught algebra, so do not grade my sentence structure.
 
2010-10-08 10:58:36 AM
liam76: Allow for teachers to be rated, the worst to be fired and the poor performers to be trained.

How do you propose they be rated? What metric(s) are fair?
 
2010-10-08 10:59:26 AM
liam76: Allow for teachers to be rated, the worst to be fired and the poor performers to be trained.


We already have a shortage of teachers.

How is firing teachers going to bring in more?

The average classroom size is now over 30 students. No one teacher can truly teach a child like that.



How will the teachers be rated? On how well the kids remember the standardized test questions? That doesn't encourage teaching and learning. That encourages route learning where kids quickly forget what they memorized and never learn the meaning behind the useless and isolated facts.

Taking myself for an example, I went through years and years of poor math grades. It wasn't until college where a professor took the time to teach us not simply the math problem of the day, but how it all fits together. I was simply never taught that everything I was learning year after year was connected so deeply together because instead I was simply being drilled what seemed to me random facts.
 
2010-10-08 11:00:19 AM
Except that's not what Ebert said. He mentions it as one of the problems that Guggenheim points out in the film.

It's a problem that's certainly worth investigating further, but it's one of a number of problems with our schools. Bunnyhat names a few of the others above. Submitter is a trolling douchenozzle.
 
2010-10-08 11:05:31 AM
Bunnyhat: I'll name some for you.

I'd add "uninvolved parents" to that list.
 
2010-10-08 11:07:34 AM
Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: Bunnyhat: I'll name some for you.

I'd add "uninvolved parents" to that list.



Thank you, forgot to list that one completely.
 
2010-10-08 11:09:20 AM
I'd argue that local funding of our schools is a disaster. In large part because of the tax money disparities, the poor neighborhoods usually get the worst schools and the wealthy neighborhoods get the best. If funding came primarily from the state level, that disparity could be greatly reduced.

Another possible problem is that local school boards are free to do truly idiotic things to their curriculum. If people in one area are largely ignorant of, oh, I don't know, basic scientific principles, they perpetuate that ignorance to all the local children by farking up the curriculum. In Texas they take that idiocy to the state level where ignorance reigns and curriculum is approved that will hurt all of their kids.
 
2010-10-08 11:10:49 AM
Angry Drunk Bureaucrat
I'd add "uninvolved parents" to that list.

My recently retired father taught for over 35 years and would wholeheartedly agree. Again and again he'd find that his most problematic students had parents who just didn't give a shiat.
 
2010-10-08 11:12:07 AM
Bunnyhat: liam76: Allow for teachers to be rated, the worst to be fired and the poor performers to be trained.


We already have a shortage of teachers.

How is firing teachers going to bring in more?

The average classroom size is now over 30 students. No one teacher can truly teach a child like that.



How will the teachers be rated? On how well the kids remember the standardized test questions? That doesn't encourage teaching and learning. That encourages route learning where kids quickly forget what they memorized and never learn the meaning behind the useless and isolated facts.

Taking myself for an example, I went through years and years of poor math grades. It wasn't until college where a professor took the time to teach us not simply the math problem of the day, but how it all fits together. I was simply never taught that everything I was learning year after year was connected so deeply together because instead I was simply being drilled what seemed to me random facts.


they could teach classrooms with 90 kids...if america had decent parents, instead of '360' degrees of slackers.

american parents are the problem.

-instant gratification nation.
 
2010-10-08 11:13:51 AM
I wonder what the dropout rate is for the students who applied to get into the charter school, but didn't. He's just lumping them back in with the rest of the students whose parents probably don't even know what a charter school is.
 
2010-10-08 11:16:42 AM
Bauer: they could teach classrooms with 90 kids...if america had decent parents, instead of '360' degrees of slackers.

american parents are the problem.

-instant gratification nation.



I agree, to a point, but there's no way for the government to change that.

Teachers or the Board of Education can not force parents to do their job, so we have to find methods that doesn't depend on it.
 
2010-10-08 11:17:16 AM
Bunnyhat: liam76: Allow for teachers to be rated, the worst to be fired and the poor performers to be trained.


We already have a shortage of teachers.

How is firing teachers going to bring in more?

The average classroom size is now over 30 students. No one teacher can truly teach a child like that.



How will the teachers be rated? On how well the kids remember the standardized test questions? That doesn't encourage teaching and learning. That encourages route learning where kids quickly forget what they memorized and never learn the meaning behind the useless and isolated facts.

Taking myself for an example, I went through years and years of poor math grades. It wasn't until college where a professor took the time to teach us not simply the math problem of the day, but how it all fits together. I was simply never taught that everything I was learning year after year was connected so deeply together because instead I was simply being drilled what seemed to me random facts.


This whole class size thing is just a myth. Asian schools regularly have over 50 kids in a class, and they are KILLING us in math and engineering...and pretty much everything else.

Class size is not nearly as important as a teacher who commands the class. Too many stupid 22 year old uglies get into teaching so they can spend time the precious little snowflakes. The snowflakes that can't reject them.
 
2010-10-08 11:18:20 AM
Bunnyhat: Bauer: they could teach classrooms with 90 kids...if america had decent parents, instead of '360' degrees of slackers.

american parents are the problem.

-instant gratification nation.


I agree, to a point, but there's no way for the government to change that.

Teachers or the Board of Education can not force parents to do their job, so we have to find methods that doesn't depend on it.


Year round schools, and school days that last 9-10 hours. If this is the training ground for the next generation, well then lets go gangbusters. I want a better world. Enough coddeling. Tough love. Now.
 
2010-10-08 11:23:02 AM
Biness: This whole class size thing is just a myth. Asian schools regularly have over 50 kids in a class, and they are KILLING us in math and engineering...and pretty much everything else.

Yep, there's absolutely no other factors at work there.

None at all.
 
2010-10-08 11:26:27 AM
Rev.K: liam76: Allow for teachers to be rated, the worst to be fired and the poor performers to be trained.

How do you propose they be rated? What metric(s) are fair?


Test every kid at the end of the school year. If after a year of teaching the kids are no better, you shouldn't be a teacher.


Bunnyhat: The average classroom size is now over 30 students. No one teacher can truly teach a child like that.

Most my classes in middle school were 30+.

If we didn;t have to pay bad tenured teachers so much there would be mor emoney for goo dteachers, and reardfs fro high performing teachers would attract more.

Bunnyhat: How will the teachers be rated? On how well the kids remember the standardized test questions? That doesn't encourage teaching and learning. That encourages route learning where kids quickly forget what they memorized and never learn the meaning behind the useless and isolated facts.

If kids can memorize standardized test questions kudos for them and the teacher, but I doubt it.

Reading and math aren't filled with "useles and isolated facts".

YOur argument here boils down tot here being no way to accurately test kids, which is complete garbage.

/I was going to mock you for "route" learning but I wanted to double check and some journals have it spelled that way, I wonder if that is an across the pond thing...


Bunnyhat: Taking myself for an example, I went through years and years of poor math grades. It wasn't until college where a professor took the time to teach us not simply the math problem of the day, but how it all fits together. I was simply never taught that everything I was learning year after year was connected so deeply together because instead I was simply being drilled what seemed to me random facts.

Out of curiosity what level of math did you take at college?

As for your example if you were bad at math you woudl do bad on the test, your teacher would either be trained or fired if this was common across all students preventing things like that from happening again. I am not sure how your story is an argument against teachers an objective rating.
 
2010-10-08 11:30:54 AM
we are on the downward slide...and nothing short of a world war will stop it.

face it.

we're farked.

-not every child deserves a quality education.

there. i said it.

firing douchebag parents from contaminating the world with their ill-behaved crotchfruit, would be a nice start.

zero bullshiat tolerance factor.

-who will stand against the coming hillary clinton onslaught?

it's coming...
 
2010-10-08 11:32:07 AM
liam76: Test every kid at the end of the school year. If after a year of teaching the kids are no better, you shouldn't be a teacher.

You didn't answer the question. What metric is fair?

Student grades? Graduation rates? Parent-student evaluations?

Your suggestion is too simplistic. You need specific metrics that will accurately indicate performance and those metrics need to be fair.
 
2010-10-08 11:32:15 AM
Bauer: we are on the downward slide...and nothing short of a world war will stop it.

face it.

we're farked.

-not every child deserves a quality education.

there. i said it.

firing douchebag parents from contaminating the world with their ill-behaved crotchfruit, would be a nice start.

zero bullshiat tolerance factor.

-who will stand against the coming hillary clinton onslaught?

it's coming...


not sure what the hillary part is all about, but i agree, we are farked.
 
2010-10-08 11:35:39 AM
Bauer: not every child deserves a quality education.

Okay, how do you make the highly controversial decision on which students deserve it and which don't?
 
2010-10-08 11:35:56 AM
Rev.K: You didn't answer the question. What metric is fair?

Student grades? Graduation rates? Parent-student evaluations?


Tax cuts.
 
2010-10-08 11:37:16 AM
Biness: Bauer: we are on the downward slide...and nothing short of a world war will stop it.

face it.

we're farked.

-not every child deserves a quality education.

there. i said it.

firing douchebag parents from contaminating the world with their ill-behaved crotchfruit, would be a nice start.

zero bullshiat tolerance factor.

-who will stand against the coming hillary clinton onslaught?

it's coming...

not sure what the hillary part is all about, but i agree, we are farked.


she will cure all of our problems, large and small, with the wave of her paw.

the next four years are going to be stellar.

everything is hilldog.

wait until these kids can vote.
 
2010-10-08 11:46:32 AM
Rev.K: liam76: Test every kid at the end of the school year. If after a year of teaching the kids are no better, you shouldn't be a teacher.

You didn't answer the question. What metric is fair?

Student grades? Graduation rates? Parent-student evaluations?

Your suggestion is too simplistic. You need specific metrics that will accurately indicate performance and those metrics need to be fair.


A standardized test for the kids.

What metric would be unfair if you are tracking improvement?
 
2010-10-08 11:48:27 AM
Rev.K: Bauer: not every child deserves a quality education.

Okay, how do you make the highly controversial decision on which students deserve it and which don't?


the kids make that decision for themselves.
 
2010-10-08 11:54:07 AM
Rev.K: Bauer: not every child deserves a quality education.

Okay, how do you make the highly controversial decision on which students deserve it and which don't?


i'm in the observation dept.

not the implementation dept.

i will not lie to you...

-i haven't a clue.
 
2010-10-08 11:57:09 AM
liam76: A standardized test for the kids.

What metric would be unfair if you are tracking improvement?


The problem is the other factors facing teachers in the classroom. Things like large class sizes, inadequate supplies and resources and others. Not every classroom is the same and there could easily be very good reasons why one teacher does not put up as high a score as another and it may have nothing to do with their teaching ability.

I'm not saying there's no way to gauge teacher performance or that it shouldn't happen, I'm saying that you need to use metrics that are comparable and make sense. A standardized test on whether or not kids are "better" at the end of the year falls short in my opinion.
 
2010-10-08 11:59:50 AM
if you want my opinion...

we should take a lesson from israel.

mandatory service after high school.

fail that...and you are a 'burger flipper' for life, or until you get your shiat together.

some kind of service. something to build an individuals sense of self worth, without the sugar coating.

-the times, they are a changing.
 
2010-10-08 12:02:36 PM
Rev.K: The problem is the other factors facing teachers in the classroom. Things like large class sizes, inadequate supplies and resources and others. Not every classroom is the same and there could easily be very good reasons why one teacher does not put up as high a score as another and it may have nothing to do with their teaching ability.

Class size and access to supplies is going to be the same through out a school and pretty standard across the district.

Rev.K: I'm not saying there's no way to gauge teacher performance or that it shouldn't happen, I'm saying that you need to use metrics that are comparable and make sense. A standardized test on whether or not kids are "better" at the end of the year falls short in my opinion.

So you don't think seeing if kids learned anything in the year they are with a teacher is a poor way to gauge how well a teacher taught?
 
2010-10-08 12:04:36 PM
liam76: Rev.K: liam76: Test every kid at the end of the school year. If after a year of teaching the kids are no better, you shouldn't be a teacher.

You didn't answer the question. What metric is fair?

Student grades? Graduation rates? Parent-student evaluations?

Your suggestion is too simplistic. You need specific metrics that will accurately indicate performance and those metrics need to be fair.

A standardized test for the kids.

What metric would be unfair if you are tracking improvement?


Standardized testing is inherently unfair. A certain kids will do better on those test regardless of the quality and abilities of the teacher. Other kids will do poorly regardless of the quality and abilities of the teacher.

A teacher who can get kids in danger of dropping out to finish school even if it is just at 50+1 and out isn't worth less then a teacher with a class of students with dedicated parents and a desire to learn. One of those teachers needs to point the kids to a goal and they will find their way. The other needs to coach, coax, threaten, and beg the student to just learn enough in the class time to get through.

Under standardized testing the 2nd teacher would be considered to be the worse of the two.
 
2010-10-08 12:07:48 PM
Bauer:
we are on the downward slide...and nothing short of a world war will stop it.

face it.

we're farked.

-not every child deserves a quality education.

there. i said it.

firing douchebag parents from contaminating the world with their ill-behaved crotchfruit, would be a nice start.

zero bullshiat tolerance factor.

-who will stand against the coming hillary clinton onslaught?

it's coming...


What you've said makes no farking sense whatsoever and yet I find myself wanting to subscribe to your newsletter. Do you do poetry slams?
 
2010-10-08 12:10:43 PM
liam76: Test every kid at the end of the school year. If after a year of teaching the kids are no better, you shouldn't be a teacher.

You know how I know you've never taught anyone anything a day in your life?

We're going to grade the teacher based on the evaluation of all their students on a standardized test? That is incredibly ignorant of multiple factors that work against teachers every day. First and foremost are there are students who simply don't care. Their grades aren't going to improve; actually they'll get worse, because while they don't care to learn anything new, the tests get harder every year. There are students who simply do badly on standardized tests; or tests as a whole. They know the material, they can prove they know it, but not necessarily on a standardized test. There are students who shouldn't be in the grade level they are in, but they are there anyway. No Child Left Behind says they have to get bumped up no matter if they deserve it or not.

Those three alone are going to drop a teacher's test grades. Not even the best teacher can guarantee that they can improve every one of their students. How about when a teacher's grades plateau? A teacher will eventually reach a passing rate of, say, 95% if they are very good and very lucky. So what happens when this very good teacher has an off year or off students and falls to 90%? You going to fire them? Or they have 5 straight years of 95%? They aren't improving. By your metric, they should be fired.

You know nothing of education and what teachers go through. Shut up.
 
2010-10-08 12:12:14 PM
liam76: Class size and access to supplies is going to be the same through out a school and pretty standard across the district.

Holy crap you're an idiot. You should have gone to my HS district. One really bad school, the mid-range one I went too, and 3 very high range schools. The difference? The other three were in very rich areas. They got FAR better materials and equipment than we did their class sizes were smaller.
 
2010-10-08 12:15:19 PM
patrick767: Bauer:
we are on the downward slide...and nothing short of a world war will stop it.

face it.

we're farked.

-not every child deserves a quality education.

there. i said it.

firing douchebag parents from contaminating the world with their ill-behaved crotchfruit, would be a nice start.

zero bullshiat tolerance factor.

-who will stand against the coming hillary clinton onslaught?

it's coming...


What you've said makes no farking sense whatsoever and yet I find myself wanting to subscribe to your newsletter. Do you do poetry slams?


you bring the coffee...and i'll bring the crazy.
 
2010-10-08 12:16:32 PM
GAT_00: liam76: Class size and access to supplies is going to be the same through out a school and pretty standard across the district.

Holy crap you're an idiot. You should have gone to my HS district. One really bad school, the mid-range one I went too, and 3 very high range schools. The difference? The other three were in very rich areas. They got FAR better materials and equipment than we did their class sizes were smaller.


well case closed. your mastery of "spelling" and "english" is enough to convince that your school was truly terrible.
 
2010-10-08 12:20:56 PM
liam76: Class size and access to supplies is going to be the same through out a school and pretty standard across the district.


You are an ignorant fool if you believe that.

I went to two different high schools. I was about the same distance away from both of them and they were in the same district.

The one I went from 9th grade was horrible. It served the mostly poor area of town. The building was horrible, the classes were packed, hardly anyone cared about learning. It was one of the poorer performing schools in the entire district.

10th-12th grade the school zones shifted a bit and I went to the other high school. It was an area of middle to high income families. The difference was night and day. They are one of the top 5 schools in the state.


Guess which one I did better at?
 
2010-10-08 12:22:12 PM
Biness: GAT_00: liam76: Class size and access to supplies is going to be the same through out a school and pretty standard across the district.

Holy crap you're an idiot. You should have gone to my HS district. One really bad school, the mid-range one I went too, and 3 very high range schools. The difference? The other three were in very rich areas. They got FAR better materials and equipment than we did their class sizes were smaller.

well case closed. your mastery of "spelling" and "english" is enough to convince that your school was truly terrible.


-he means well...and is very passionate about his beliefs.

so cut him some slack.

it could be worse.

try reading posts on facebook.

-god...fark is the shiat.

that little five bucks goes a long way.
 
2010-10-08 12:25:35 PM
liam76: Class size and access to supplies is going to be the same through out a school and pretty standard across the district.

You really haven't a clue, do you?
 
2010-10-08 12:35:11 PM
liam76: So you don't think seeing if kids learned anything in the year they are with a teacher is a poor way to gauge how well a teacher taught?

Honestly, some years teachers get a classroom filled with smart, enthusiastic students, and some years they get dumb kids who don't give a shiat.
 
2010-10-08 12:35:46 PM
Biness: well case closed. your mastery of "spelling" and "english" is enough to convince that your school was truly terrible.

My school was not terrible. It was, just, pretty average. The fully rural school, at the edge of the country, was quite bad. But keep on telling me how the school I went to was.

You know nothing. Stop pretending like you do.
 
2010-10-08 12:36:21 PM
2 biggest problems with schools in this country? The NEA & the fact that school budgets are determined by a district's property taxes. A well-to-do area will have a larger budget, a poor, urban area will have a smaller budget. I know--I've taught in both.

The NEA is the biggest waste of space in the country. It's the largest union and has done NOTHING to attract new teachers. When I first stated teaching in the early 90s, salaries were an average of $42K--and that was after a decade-long battle to raise it from the average of $35 it was in the 80s. 20 years later, average starting salary is $47K. But while I taught, I saw sooooo many burnt-out teachers, just drifting through the days in order to collect their pensions. And once they've got tenure, it's nearly impossible to fire them. Most would get the cushy College-Prep courses (easy to teach because the kids WANT to learn) while all the young firebrands, fresh out of college and armed with the most up-to-date teaching methods, would get the lowest-track kids--the burn-outs, gang members, and kids just waiting to be old enough to quit school. And the NEA encourages this because College Prep classes are seen as a promotion, so therefore must go to the ones with the most tenure.

/Wouldn't go back even if they doubled the salary
//Once you get used to the administration f*cking you over, you still have to deal w/the helicopter parents.
 
Displayed 50 of 229 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report