These school reform bills need your support

If these bills pass, experienced teachers will be fired for being too expensive. The kids will lose.

"...for the sake of California's children..."

When this appears as part of any argument the old BS meter swings into the red (or brown) zone.

It's not about the childreen, and they know it. There is no limit to the bastards' greed. Screw 'em.

There will be lots of brown noses if the school district can place $ before efficiency and experience.

Ok when you include police, firefighters and airline pilots in this, sure I'll vote for it.

Why is it considered great to be a veteran in any other field but teaching. The reason inner city schools can't generally keep their teaching staff of veterans is that they are not treated well and find better positions elsewhere, not because they are incompetent.

I will be writing to these politicians to set them straight and tell them not to support the bill. If communities that are low income supported education they would keep their veteran teachers. "New" doesn't necessarily mean better.

So I guess you don't mind changing this for firefighters as well- lets lay off the most experienced first. Oh wait, they don't leave because they are paid better and treated better than teachers.

Bam wrote:

If these bills pass, experienced teachers will be fired for being too expensive. The kids will lose.

Maybe you have an LAUSD job to lose?

Bam wrote:

If these bills pass, experienced teachers will be fired for being too expensive. The kids will lose.

Yes, true. Good to you on this. I know all to well that there are so many opponents to public education today, this is one of my biggest issues. Keep up the fight for a decent education for ALL children, Bam.

Some teachers or whatever profession have people with 25 years of experience.

Some teachers or whatever professions have people with 1 year of experience 25 times.

What is wrong with getting rid of the 1 year, 25 times teacher?

Please do not insult yourself by saying that they do not exist!

LA Teacher wrote:

Ok when you include police, firefighters and airline pilots in this, sure I'll vote for it.
Why is it considered great to be a veteran in any other field but teaching. The reason inner city schools can't generally keep their teaching staff of veterans is that they are not treated well and find better positions elsewhere, not because they are incompetent.
I will be writing to these politicians to set them straight and tell them not to support the bill. If communities that are low income supported education they would keep their veteran teachers. "New" doesn't necessarily mean better.
So I guess you don't mind changing this for firefighters as well- lets lay off the most experienced first. Oh wait, they don't leave because they are paid better and treated better than teachers.

You hit the nail on the head, I'm glad I'm not in your occupational field! How would all these people feel if an apprentice was responsible for the construction of their office buildings! Journeymen are able to do a far much better job than an apprentice!
Now to all the "naysayers" who will respond that teaching is not the same as construction, experienced teachers have probably developed more skills at addressing the child's needs than a less experienced teacher.

Tyrone wrote:

Some teachers or whatever profession have people with 25 years of experience.
Some teachers or whatever professions have people with 1 year of experience 25 times.
What is wrong with getting rid of the 1 year, 25 times teacher?
Please do not insult yourself by saying that they do not exist!

1 year, 25 times? Or a teacher who is a first year teacher 25 times?(Maybe they quit and rehired every year for 25 years) Or a 25 year veteran with the skills of a first year teacher? Or 25 first year teachers?
I don't see any insults at all! Just a very acute observation!

If the the teachers "mafia" is against it, then I'm all for it!

DRW wrote:

"...for the sake of California's children..."
When this appears as part of any argument the old BS meter swings into the red (or brown) zone.
It's not about the childreen, and they know it. There is no limit to the bastards' greed. Screw 'em.

DRW: Screw you, you foul bastard

SB 955 is "languishing" in committee because it was a poorly conceived bill.

Huff felt that teacher-bashing had become socially acceptable and thought that in the current environment his bill would be embraced by the non-teaching masses who are unfamiliar with the origins of the seniority rule. Those who fully consider the implications of eliminating seniority can see the ultimate conclusion to this inane proposal - lots of lawsuits and a return to the seniority system when it becomes evident that eliminating it is a mistake.

Once again, I have to point out that seniority is a portion of the due process rights granted to civil service employees to discourage meddling by elected officials. It comes from the same set of protections that replaced the "spoils system" of government.

There is one equitable way to handle layoffs (which it should be remembered have only occurred on this level a few times in the past 50 years) and that is seniority. SB955 is a knee-jerk reaction to a temporary economic downturn. That kind of reactionary thinking is what causes long-term problems in a system. Huff's bill is dying because after people have considered it, they have found it has no merit.

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." Maybe Huff should have paid more attention in his government class.

Public education is a right guaranteed to all Americans, public education is super-important, as are teachers. It needs our support and backing, certainly not to be trashed on Topix.

Bam wrote:

If these bills pass, experienced teachers will be fired for being too expensive. The kids will lose.

The younger teachers tend to have better training, more energy and a desire to earn their paychecks.

Older teachers are used to sucking the system dry vis a vis their union. They are complacent and could care less about how their children do once their employment is assured.

Look at CA's test scores. It tells the whole story about how well the current system of retaining the tenured teachers is working out, or more like, not working out, for that matter.

most kids today go to school to learn to be on welfare. and milk the system..

Just keep throwing money at it. It's a proven fact, the more money you throw at a problem the more they will need. Raise everybody's taxes, rich and poor and in between and massively fund education. Make California the highest funded School system in the world.

think for a minute wrote:

<quoted text>
The younger teachers tend to have better training, more energy and a desire to earn their paychecks.
Older teachers are used to sucking the system dry vis a vis their union. They are complacent and could care less about how their children do once their employment is assured.
Look at CA's test scores. It tells the whole story about how well the current system of retaining the tenured teachers is working out, or more like, not working out, for that matter.

Evidence please?? That is not true. They actually have less rigorous training than veteran teachers and generally are way to easy on the students. They often don't correct their grammar and spelling and don't complete enough writing assignments with them. Tenured teachers work very, very hard and put in many hours.

LA Teacher wrote:

<quoted text>
Evidence please?? That is not true. They actually have less rigorous training than veteran teachers and generally are way to easy on the students. They often don't correct their grammar and spelling and don't complete enough writing assignments with them. Tenured teachers work very, very hard and put in many hours.

My oh my. Surely it wasn't your intention to portray California education in such a biased fashion?

Why does more than 1/2 of our state budget go to education and yet we are still at the bottom when compared to other states?(I won't mention California's comparison to other countries which we would typically wag our heads at.)

That evidence speaks for itself.

No one should entertain any discussion with a California teacher until they are willing to put those hard facts of standardized test scores, which even President Obama requires of them.

Shame on you union teachers drawing a paycheck and producing such deplorable results.

LA Teacher wrote:

Ok when you include police, firefighters and airline pilots in this, sure I'll vote for it.
Why is it considered great to be a veteran in any other field but teaching. The reason inner city schools can't generally keep their teaching staff of veterans is that they are not treated well and find better positions elsewhere, not because they are incompetent.
I will be writing to these politicians to set them straight and tell them not to support the bill. If communities that are low income supported education they would keep their veteran teachers. "New" doesn't necessarily mean better.
So I guess you don't mind changing this for firefighters as well- lets lay off the most experienced first. Oh wait, they don't leave because they are paid better and treated better than teachers.

To this I will add that Administrators have to do their job and document to get rid off disfunctional teachers. If we have bad and inept teachers at the schools is because the Administrators keep passing them on. By the way how many of these teachers opponents have been in the classroom? My children's teachers worked very hard and were efficient. Most of them were veterans.

Also, I will provide some weight to whatever the politicians claim when they giveup their perdiem. Nobody but me pays for my gas or food. Taxpayers should not be paying for politicians food or gas. Politicians have a salary. They should manage to spend within their means.