What do you do?
If you run a business or if you are a supervisor, what do you do if you have an employee who is constantly insubordinate, or incompetent, or just not able to perform the job that they were hired to perform? Most people would fire the employee, or retrain them, or in some way take action to remove them from that position so as to minimize the damage that they could do to the organization.
On the other hand, what would you do as a supervisor or owner if you had an employee who was a true superstar who outperformed and outworked everyone else around? What would you do if you had an employee who was getting results that were above and beyond what was expected or required? Most people would find a way to reward or promote this employee or to recognize this outstanding performer and to motivate this person to continue to perform at those levels.
Sadly, in the important world of education, supervisors do not have the option of taking the courses of action listed above for either type of employee. Although teachers perform one of the most important jobs in the world, teacher's unions have used their power and influence to ensure that poor teachers continue to work along side good teachers in our schools.
When a new teacher is hired in School District 11, the Colorado Springs Education Association, a private organization that is controlled from Washington, D.C., tells these new teachers that they should join the union so that they will have job protection. Common sense would tell you that good quality teachers are not in danger of being fired from teaching jobs. Good quality teachers are, in fact, in demand. They are in no danger of being terminated from their jobs. Therefore, the only people who the union protects are the low performing teachers. The damage that this does to students is not relevant to the union leadership. It is more important for them that the union gets this union member's dues than it is whether or not children are being adequately educated. Beyond the damage to students is the damage that this does to the morale of good teachers. It does not boost the morale of a good, hard working teacher when a fellow teacher does less work but makes more money simply because they have been employed for a longer period of time.
The problem with removing low performing teachers goes beyond the union contract. Due to millions of teacher union lobbying dollars, state law has been written to construct a long and expensive trail to remove a bad teacher from the classroom. As important as a good teacher is to the success of a child in a classroom, the union places its political funding ahead of the success of our schools.
The following link leads to the website of Common Good. The website shows a real world example of what it takes in Colorado to remove an insubordinate or low performing teacher from the classroom:
http://cgood.org/Colorado-dismissal.html
The union does not want this to change. As the union continues to purchase seats for school boards and legislatures, they are ensuring that this will never change and that accountability will not be a part of public education. The parents, taxpayers and students will continue to be the losers in this battle for quality schools.
On the other hand, what would you do as a supervisor or owner if you had an employee who was a true superstar who outperformed and outworked everyone else around? What would you do if you had an employee who was getting results that were above and beyond what was expected or required? Most people would find a way to reward or promote this employee or to recognize this outstanding performer and to motivate this person to continue to perform at those levels.
Sadly, in the important world of education, supervisors do not have the option of taking the courses of action listed above for either type of employee. Although teachers perform one of the most important jobs in the world, teacher's unions have used their power and influence to ensure that poor teachers continue to work along side good teachers in our schools.
When a new teacher is hired in School District 11, the Colorado Springs Education Association, a private organization that is controlled from Washington, D.C., tells these new teachers that they should join the union so that they will have job protection. Common sense would tell you that good quality teachers are not in danger of being fired from teaching jobs. Good quality teachers are, in fact, in demand. They are in no danger of being terminated from their jobs. Therefore, the only people who the union protects are the low performing teachers. The damage that this does to students is not relevant to the union leadership. It is more important for them that the union gets this union member's dues than it is whether or not children are being adequately educated. Beyond the damage to students is the damage that this does to the morale of good teachers. It does not boost the morale of a good, hard working teacher when a fellow teacher does less work but makes more money simply because they have been employed for a longer period of time.
The problem with removing low performing teachers goes beyond the union contract. Due to millions of teacher union lobbying dollars, state law has been written to construct a long and expensive trail to remove a bad teacher from the classroom. As important as a good teacher is to the success of a child in a classroom, the union places its political funding ahead of the success of our schools.
The following link leads to the website of Common Good. The website shows a real world example of what it takes in Colorado to remove an insubordinate or low performing teacher from the classroom:
http://cgood.org/Colorado-dismissal.html
The union does not want this to change. As the union continues to purchase seats for school boards and legislatures, they are ensuring that this will never change and that accountability will not be a part of public education. The parents, taxpayers and students will continue to be the losers in this battle for quality schools.
posted by Craig Cox | 2:21 PM
12 Comments:
My wife is a Good Quality Teacher who got fed up with the Liberal policies of a corrupt Union.
Now she Homeschools our children, and we are fortunate enough to never have our children exposed to the liberal, uncaring agenda of Union parots.
It's people like Tanner that drive the good teachers away from our kids.
Continue the fight, it is a just one.
My point in another post is that the Master Agreement does not help good teachers like your wife. It discourages them by protecting the poor teachers. The majority of D11 teachers (or teachers from any surrounding district) are hard working, caring, and competent. They want to succeed and they want their students to succeed. The union leadership and its apologists (such as Tanner) are not concerned about the students or the good teachers. Their concern is simply for the money that teachers pay to the union through involuntary paycheck withdrawals. In my opinion, what is good for the District is also good for the teachers. The union is a private organization whose leadership is not concerned about "what is good for the District." Your wife's departure is our loss.
While these absentee figures are outrageous enough, they don't tell the whole story. My child (actually 2 of my children) had one of these CSEA leaders for a teacher. Although the official numbers indicate that this teacher was absent for "x" number of days, the reality is that he was absent more than that. There were days when this teacher would be in the building doing union work while a substitute teacher showed movies in his classroom. For some reason, the school did not count him absent. If the union actually defends this behavior, it is time to dump the union.
Yes, this policy of days off for union business needs ot change pronto. Just another abuse the CSEA Master Agreement allows.
Anyone reading this should contact the Board of Education, District 11, prior to this coming Wednesday's board meeting in support of engaging community members in the UNION CONTRACT NEGOTIATION process. Come to the meeting at 6:30 pm and speak your mind - tell the status quoers on the board that the union does not run this district well and things need to change (specifically teachers need to teach, not politic in our schools!)
It's that easy people! If there is enough pressure from the public calling for this change to how we hammer out that agreement with the union, we MIGHT see some improvements in what our children receive.
If you all stay home, then don't complain.
I suppose that wasn't fair or kind. You can opt to contact the board via email, phone of fax using the contact information at the district/board website: www.cssd11.k12.co.us.boe
What's needed is for some people to look at facts, and not just assumptions. Mr. Christen ridiculously inflated the numbers posted by Mr.Cox on this website, and was never challenged on it.
Just like the figures about the amount of money raised by your opponents in 2005. (And yes, while they didn't run against you head to head, they were, no doubt, YOUR opponents. And YOUR candidates took the fall for YOU.) First, you people claimed that they raised $1M, which is inflated. Then, when it didn't seem outrageous enough, it grew to $1.5 mil and then $1.7 mil. Make up your minds, will you? And, while you're at it, get All Children Matter to declare how much they actually donated; Bob Gardner's comment that it was "around $100,000" isn't worhty of even a snicker.
I like facts, too. Hence this blog. As for the "numbers" that Christen posted, I can't help you there. You don't say what you are talking about.
Are you really disputing the election spending by your people in '05? You claim to like facts, so please enlighten us on the true figures. The Gazette just reported the $1 million amount as well. As for the 3 reform candidates, sorry, your allegations of hidden contributions just won't fly. I already posted the transcripts from the hearing where your man Gerald Fornander made that accusation and was summarily dismissed.
Funny that your candidates defeated the 3 honorable candidates by spending about $40 per vote, while the others spent only $19 per vote and barely lost. Also funny that your candidates had to pretend to be "constructive conservatives" to win. Remind me again what ideas they have brought to the board so far?
Poor Tom is still frustrated that after all that union money they STILL don't have a majority willing to sit by and let kids suffer.
Here's a fact for you. After a majority of the teachers in this district were polled, 85% of them supported the recall of BOTH candidates. Sounds like you haven't gotten your message out to the employees of your district. I know that I will hear the spin of "they just fear the accountability that Eric brings." Well, we have had to be accountable long before Eric and Sandy ever came along. Just ask a teacher to see the paperwork that must be done to fill out IEP's (SPED documentation),ILP's (individual learning plans), PDSA's (Plan, do, study, act), lesson plans, etc. Then let's throw in the testing that has continually been done. Most of all, we've been accountable to parents forever. It's a wonder we can actually teach! So please don't try and tell us that we fear them. We don't believe that they are doing what is best in this district for kids. Listen to the data for a change.
I hope this doesn’t upset you, but I agree with what you say. First of all, it doesn’t surprise me that 85% of the teachers support the recall. You are right – we don’t have a PR firm to get our message out. You get your “message” about the board, including “motives,” from your union leadership. They barrage you with misinformation about some of us and after a while you begin to believe what you are told.
I don’t argue that you are overburdened by paperwork and testing. Much of that is driven by state and federal requirements. Those of us who you consider to be evil have been the ones pushing for wither waivers or rejection of federal funds (a very small % of our total budget) so that some of those burdens can be taken from you. Your board members don’t want to discuss that. We have proposed the elimination of tests that you teachers don’t feel actually helps you in teaching. That proposal has gone nowhere. I have always been a critic of CQI. I think that it takes a lot of your time with very little value added to your classroom.
To the specific issue of accountability, you know some “poor” teachers in the district or in your school building. After they have been on the job for 3 years, what happens to them if they continue to be a poor performer? Tell me the accountability piece after 3 years.
What have Gudvangen, Hasling, and Mann done or proposed that is best for kids? Please be more specific than, “They support public schools.” Additionally, what have Christen and Shakes proposed or implemented that has been bad for kids?
As far as looking at data for a change, we are looking at data. We have been looking at it and we need to improve as a district. I contend that the administrative bureaucracy is a big problem. We have chosen to give more power and authority to you at the school sites to address that. We have proposed a reduction in the bureaucracy and have frozen admin hiring. I would guess that if you lined up your list of “what is best for kids” with our side’s “agenda,” you will find an almost exact match.
Thanks for writing.
The U word? Isn't this an association? A true union would have an QA. Quality Assurance protects the consumers rights to a good product. We have no process to assure that equality is in every graduate. Parents and taxpayers are the stakeholders and we should continue to demand that each child gets the same education. We have to do something drastic to change. I recommend that, teachers whom have had problems and moved to avoid notice should not be able to collect their transition pay for their last year of teaching. Something has to be withheld if the quality is lacking. A real Union would examine itself for quality. I am a card holder and this gives my true union a bad name.
You point to a big issue. The union leadership does not make any quality assurance promises. When you look at the items that are discussed at NEA or AFT meetings, educating kids is rarely on the list. I have asked numerous times for someone to give me examples of union leadership proposals to improve our schools. I have yet to receive an answer. While the members (teachers) focus on achievement in their classrooms, the union itself is not a player in education.
Post a Comment
<< Home