Senate Bill 5 Targets Collective Bargaining for Elimination!

• Footwedge

  Vote Yes on this issue for a whole bunch of reasons. Teachers should be, at least somewhat paid for performance and not tenure. There are ways to grade the performance of teachers beyond the state tests. Attendance, attitude, respect from students/peers, effort, dedication to profession, people skills, et al....the way private industry employees are graded.
  
  Teachers are human geings. We humans need to be incentivized to do well. The present system punishes the overachieving teacher...and that is simply not right.
  
  Pensions...come on man. The state, much like the country, is broke. I would eliminate pensions for ALL state employees. Period. You want to retire rich? Save your own damn money....like the private industry people have to do.
• Swamp Fox

  Merit pay sounds terrific on the surface. It isn't. Comparing teachers performances and the levels of their "merit" is virtually impossible and terribly divisive. How do you rate a teacher who deals with low ability groups all day and a teacher who has only high level achievers that actually like school and want to be there? How do you rate a teacher who has a classroom full of students whose siblings have already dropped out, live in high crime areas and have unemployed or absent or imprisoned parents who haven't even seen their kids for months? And combine that with the conservative wish that all forms of collective bargaining needs to be eliminated so that those in power have nothing whatsoever stopping them from getting rid of people, not because they are poor teachers but because they are "troublemakers". Somewhere we have seemingly lost the concept of freedom of expression and the right to negotiate for improved living conditions for our public employees. If this whole thing goes through, we will be subsidizing private schools and ignoring the public schools, or at least we will have that possibility hovering over us. And the question that bothers me perhaps more than any other is...Who will be doing this "Evaluating"? How long were these "evaluators" in a public classroom themselves before they chose to get out and head to administrative positions which pay quite a bit more but take the former teacher away from the actual occurences in the classrooms. It will result in pitting teacher against teacher, not to mention the removal of a basic right that we have had since the beginning of our country...the right of freedom of expression and the right to negotiate our conditions of employment.
  
  Merit pay on the surface, is a good idea, however I don't think that the proponents of this idea are concerned at all about the quality of the teaching. I think they just want to do away with collective bargaining and then shift our attention more toward charter schools and other private institutions which have not had near the success rates of our good public schools around this country.
  
  I think it is also important to remember that this merit pay issue isn't just about teachers. It will eventually effect every area of public employment and will present the same problems that I have mentioned regarding the teaching profession. Merit pay is a smokescreen hiding the real agenda of those who purport to know what's best for America's children. I'm sorry but if I have a medical problem, I consult my physician. If I have a problem with one of my kids understanding a concept taught in class and want it solved, I talk to the teacher...not the person that develops the "standards" that will potentially fire the teacher.
• WebFire

  Swamp Fox;932254 wrote:Merit pay sounds terrific on the surface. It isn't. Comparing teachers performances and the levels of their "merit" is virtually impossible and terribly divisive. How do you rate a teacher who deals with low ability groups all day and a teacher who has only high level achievers that actually like school and want to be there? How do you rate a teacher who has a classroom full of students whose siblings have already dropped out, live in high crime areas and have unemployed or absent or imprisoned parents who haven't even seen their kids for months? And combine that with the conservative wish that all forms of collective bargaining needs to be eliminated so that those in power have nothing whatsoever stopping them from getting rid of people, not because they are poor teachers but because they are "troublemakers".

  This defense against merit pay is overused and plain wrong. How do you think they evaluate the IT guy vs. the accounting guy? It's no different.
• QuakerOats

  Swamp Fox;932254 wrote:Merit pay sounds terrific on the surface. It isn't. Comparing teachers performances and the levels of their "merit" is virtually impossible and terribly divisive.

  COP OUT. But I can somewhat understand the thinking when one has been so entrenched in a one-size-fits-all-union-contract-mentality for sooo long. The private sector handles reviews and performance assessments every day across myriad types of workers in every facet of operations ...... good managers get it done and do so knowing that the best workers (teachers) will be beneficial to the entire enterprise and thus it is incumbent upon them to do this job properly for the benefit of all. No one is re-inventing the wheel here. Next.
• Writerbuckeye

  

  Swamp Fox;932254 wrote:Merit pay sounds terrific on the surface. It isn't. Comparing teachers performances and the levels of their "merit" is virtually impossible and terribly divisive. How do you rate a teacher who deals with low ability groups all day and a teacher who has only high level achievers that actually like school and want to be there? How do you rate a teacher who has a classroom full of students whose siblings have already dropped out, live in high crime areas and have unemployed or absent or imprisoned parents who haven't even seen their kids for months? And combine that with the conservative wish that all forms of collective bargaining needs to be eliminated so that those in power have nothing whatsoever stopping them from getting rid of people, not because they are poor teachers but because they are "troublemakers". Somewhere we have seemingly lost the concept of freedom of expression and the right to negotiate for improved living conditions for our public employees. If this whole thing goes through, we will be subsidizing private schools and ignoring the public schools, or at least we will have that possibility hovering over us. And the question that bothers me perhaps more than any other is...Who will be doing this "Evaluating"? How long were these "evaluators" in a public classroom themselves before they chose to get out and head to administrative positions which pay quite a bit more but take the former teacher away from the actual occurences in the classrooms. It will result in pitting teacher against teacher, not to mention the removal of a basic right that we have had since the beginning of our country...the right of freedom of expression and the right to negotiate our conditions of employment.
  
  Merit pay on the surface, is a good idea, however I don't think that the proponents of this idea are concerned at all about the quality of the teaching. I think they just want to do away with collective bargaining and then shift our attention more toward charter schools and other private institutions which have not had near the success rates of our good public schools around this country.
  
  I think it is also important to remember that this merit pay issue isn't just about teachers. It will eventually effect every area of public employment and will present the same problems that I have mentioned regarding the teaching profession. Merit pay is a smokescreen hiding the real agenda of those who purport to know what's best for America's children. I'm sorry but if I have a medical problem, I consult my physician. If I have a problem with one of my kids understanding a concept taught in class and want it solved, I talk to the teacher...not the person that develops the "standards" that will potentially fire the teacher.

  
• QuakerOats

  Footwedge;932236 wrote:Vote Yes on this issue for a whole bunch of reasons. Teachers should be, at least somewhat paid for performance and not tenure. There are ways to grade the performance of teachers beyond the state tests. Attendance, attitude, respect from students/peers, effort, dedication to profession, people skills, et al....the way private industry employees are graded.
  
  Teachers are human geings. We humans need to be incentivized to do well. The present system punishes the overachieving teacher...and that is simply not right.
  
  Pensions...come on man. The state, much like the country, is broke. I would eliminate pensions for ALL state employees. Period. You want to retire rich? Save your own damn money....like the private industry people have to do.

  Alleluia ............ FW has been 'saved'
• Footwedge

  QuakerOats;932309 wrote:Alleluia ............ FW has been 'saved'

  Isn't it spelled Hallelula with an H? .
  
  Once a staunch, across the board conservative like yourself, I still hold onto many conservative views. It just doesn't always seem that way.
  :thumbup:
• jmog

  Swamp Fox;932254 wrote:Merit pay sounds terrific on the surface. It isn't. Comparing teachers performances and the levels of their "merit" is virtually impossible and terribly divisive. How do you rate a teacher who deals with low ability groups all day and a teacher who has only high level achievers that actually like school and want to be there? How do you rate a teacher who has a classroom full of students whose siblings have already dropped out, live in high crime areas and have unemployed or absent or imprisoned parents who haven't even seen their kids for months? And combine that with the conservative wish that all forms of collective bargaining needs to be eliminated so that those in power have nothing whatsoever stopping them from getting rid of people, not because they are poor teachers but because they are "troublemakers". Somewhere we have seemingly lost the concept of freedom of expression and the right to negotiate for improved living conditions for our public employees. If this whole thing goes through, we will be subsidizing private schools and ignoring the public schools, or at least we will have that possibility hovering over us. And the question that bothers me perhaps more than any other is...Who will be doing this "Evaluating"? How long were these "evaluators" in a public classroom themselves before they chose to get out and head to administrative positions which pay quite a bit more but take the former teacher away from the actual occurences in the classrooms. It will result in pitting teacher against teacher, not to mention the removal of a basic right that we have had since the beginning of our country...the right of freedom of expression and the right to negotiate our conditions of employment.
  
  Merit pay on the surface, is a good idea, however I don't think that the proponents of this idea are concerned at all about the quality of the teaching. I think they just want to do away with collective bargaining and then shift our attention more toward charter schools and other private institutions which have not had near the success rates of our good public schools around this country.
  
  I think it is also important to remember that this merit pay issue isn't just about teachers. It will eventually effect every area of public employment and will present the same problems that I have mentioned regarding the teaching profession. Merit pay is a smokescreen hiding the real agenda of those who purport to know what's best for America's children. I'm sorry but if I have a medical problem, I consult my physician. If I have a problem with one of my kids understanding a concept taught in class and want it solved, I talk to the teacher...not the person that develops the "standards" that will potentially fire the teacher.

  Someone who hasn't worked in the real world...if your argument held any merit (pun intended) then no company in private industry would be able to successfully run a yearly appraisal system for their employees that includes merit raises.
  
  But oh wait, nearly all of them do.
• Bigdogg

  WebFire;932151 wrote:So I'm seeing this joke of a banner ad on sites all over the web, including OC...
  
  "If not for firefighters, we wouldn't have our Zoey. Vote no, Issue 2."
  
  I didn't realize Issue 2 eliminated firefighters. :rolleyes: :thumbdown:

  And the rest of the story. http://www.daytondailynews.com/news/ohio-news/ohio-grandmother-caught-in-middle-of-union-fight-1268363.html f you have to sink this low than you should know at lest the kind of people you are dealing with.
• Bigdogg

  QuakerOats;931247 wrote:Which brings us full circle to the real "douche bags", Tricky Dick Celeste and his band of liberal democrats who rammed collective bargaining of public sector employees down the throats of taxpayers in 1983, which should never have happened, and thus 'we would not be having this discussion'.

  You when it was pasted with bipartisan support as opposed to the abortion that took place with SB5? Revisionist history at its best Oatmeal.
• WebFire

  Bigdogg;932473 wrote:And the rest of the story. http://www.daytondailynews.com/news/ohio-news/ohio-grandmother-caught-in-middle-of-union-fight-1268363.html f you have to sink this low than you should know at lest the kind of people you are dealing with.

  I have to see the add again. I'm a bit confused. Quinn is against the law right? I thought the ad was against the law. Implying the law will cut staffing certainly isn't something "for" crowd would use.
  
  
• LJ

  

  WebFire;932492 wrote:I have to see the add again. I'm a bit confused. Quinn is against the law right? I thought the ad was against the law. Implying the law will cut staffing certainly isn't something "for" crowd would use.
  
  

  They chopped up her video. I haven't seen it, but if I remember correctly of what they played on the radio it was like "without firefighters zoey yada yada" then they cut in and say "that's right, if SB5 is voted down firefighters will lose their jobs"
  
  Or something along those lines
• WebFire

  LJ;932498 wrote:They chopped up her video. I haven't seen it, but if I remember correctly of what they played on the radio it was like "without firefighters zoey yada yada" then they cut in and say "that's right, if SB5 is voted down firefighters will lose their jobs"
  
  Or something along those lines

  Not sure I follow. I don't think either side can argue that firefighters will lose jobs.
• QuakerOats

  Footwedge;932413 wrote:Isn't it spelled Hallelula with an H? ./QUOTE]
  
  
  An 'A', at least in the Catholic Church.

• Glory Days

  

  WebFire;932282 wrote:This defense against merit pay is overused and plain wrong. How do you think they evaluate the IT guy vs. the accounting guy? It's no different.

  you dont. however an IT guy who works at a business with 5 computers cant be evaluated vs an IT guy at a place with hundreds and computers and their own network. yet this is kinda how it will work with teachers.
• WebFire

  Glory Days;932544 wrote:you dont. however an IT guy who works at a business with 5 computers cant be evaluated vs an IT guy at a place with hundreds and computers and their own network. yet this is kinda how it will work with teachers.

  So there is no way to know which teachers are good and which ones are not? Which ones are putting in the effort and which ones or not. I bet if I ask all the teachers, they would know.
• analogkid

  I tend agree with many on this board that basing teacher pay solely on longevity is a poor idea and that a little bit of pressure to reach goals is a good thing. But I also disagree that the private sector model is the best model for the teaching profession.
  
  I was attending some training today and the following quote was presented to the group.
  
  " Both the support of teacher development and the evaluation of teacher performance require evidence of practice... Conversations about teaching must be grounded in actual events, in actions or statement, in artefacts, or in decision teachers have made. Without such grounding, impressions of teachers skills are based entirely on the observers' own idiosyncratic views of teaching and their understanding of what has occurred and what those events mean...Mentors and coaches, no less than evaluators depend for their work on evidence of practice" (Charlotte Danielson, The Handbook of Professional Practice, 2008).
  
  This quote kind of summarizes the world in which a teacher operates; a world where concrete, reproducible, well thought out measures of accomplishment are expected. It is required that teachers assign student grades based upon some record of performance based upon a standard, not based upon their impression that a student is either "worthy of a good grade" or not. It seems reasonable to me that teachers would then expect the same level of thought in a system design to evaluate their competence.
  
  Sure a system without this kind of well thought out evaluation system might be able to improve the teaching corps by removing the most obviously incompetent teachers in a timely fashion. And just as surely some perfectly competent teachers would get removed because of the personal biases of their evaluators. The private sector's version of evaluation and reward works, but that does not mean that it is the best system. It does not seem to be geared toward informing the worker of what is expected, where they are currently at, and how to improve. This is just my impression as I have little experience in the private sector.
  
  I think that we should invest the time into creating a good system of evaluation. This system would allow the teacher to know what is expected beforehand, it would give them a snapshot of were they are at so that they could plan how to improve, and, yes, may even reward them for some level of performance. Afterall getting rid of the bad teachers is only part of the solution and could probably be accomplished by simply changing tenure rules. Like most professions, truly incompetent teachers are a small number of practicing teachers. There are many more perfectly competent teachers that could use a system to help them improve their practice. Its a numbers game. Focusing on improving the practice of a large number of teachers will have a larger impact on student achievement than focusing on getting rid of a small amount of chaff.
• jmog

  Glory Days;932544 wrote:you dont. however an IT guy who works at a business with 5 computers cant be evaluated vs an IT guy at a place with hundreds and computers and their own network. yet this is kinda how it will work with teachers.

  lol, oh yes they do compare those same two IT guys in private industry...
• Writerbuckeye

  

  Kid: Good post. I have said all along that the teachers are the ones who have to come up with their own system for recognizing achievement on which to reward by merit. They have to be the ones invested in the parameters for growth and evaluation; it simply won't work any other way.
  
  It can be done. This "can't do" attitude expressed by some on here is very disappointing to me. I was trained to be an educator (communications within the college of education at BG) and the folks who trained me were very innovative thinkers. I have no doubt any of them could have come up with a competent system that would fairly evaluate educators.
• Glory Days

  

  jmog;932660 wrote:lol, oh yes they do compare those same two IT guys in private industry...

  haha and that makes sense why?
  

  Writerbuckeye;932792 wrote:Kid: Good post. I have said all along that the teachers are the ones who have to come up with their own system for recognizing achievement on which to reward by merit. They have to be the ones invested in the parameters for growth and evaluation; it simply won't work any other way.
  
  It can be done. This "can't do" attitude expressed by some on here is very disappointing to me. I was trained to be an educator (communications within the college of education at BG) and the folks who trained me were very innovative thinkers. I have no doubt any of them could have come up with a competent system that would fairly evaluate educators.

  so let them use the system that is in place now if they want(or atleast dont jam something down their throat all at one time, give them time to come up with a system). you say let them come up with their own system, until you dont like that system. funny how that works. i can see it now. they actually come up with a merit pay system but someone like you wont like it and demand it be changed again. the system now atleast attracts young teachers to jobs they wouldnt give a second thought to on a merit pay system since the job is in a poor community etc.
• Glory Days

  

  Writerbuckeye;932792 wrote: This "can't do" attitude expressed by some on here is very disappointing to me.

  kinda like this "your system has to be like my system because my system isnt doing as good as yours" attitude.
• Writerbuckeye

  

  Glory Days;933200 wrote:kinda like this "your system has to be like my system because my system isnt doing as good as yours" attitude.

  First of all, the system now does not reward on merit -- so it needs changing. Yes, I want the teachers to be involved in changing it, but I don't want them using the current system as a crutch for a long period of time, and avoid coming up with an approach that rewards people for more than breathing. Everyone knows it will take some time, but if you give too much, it would be human nature to just leave the current way alone -- especially since the current system promotes laziness: you aren't being challenged to get better pay; everyone gets the same whether one works a lot harder than the others or not.
  
  Don't really get what you're saying the above quote, except it sounds a lot like whining.
• WebFire

  Glory Days;933200 wrote:kinda like this "your system has to be like my system because my system isnt doing as good as yours" attitude.

  Yep, sounds like a union member.
• ernest_t_bass

  

  WebFire;933253 wrote:Yep, sounds like a union member.

  Yep, sounds like a non-union member.
  
  I can do it too. That comeback is about as dumb as saying, "I'm rubber, your glue, now shut the fuck up." I'm not sure if that's how it goes, but you get the point.
• WebFire

  ernest_t_bass;933270 wrote:"I'm rubber, your glue, now shut the fuck up."

  Actually, that's exactly what Glory's comment sounded like to me. Hence my response.