Comments on: 55/25 And Voluntary School-Wide Bonuses: Reaction http://www.edwize.org/5525-and-voluntary-school-wide-bonuses-reaction Thu, 18 Mar 2010 16:36:30 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc hourly 1 By: Persam1197 http://www.edwize.org/5525-and-voluntary-school-wide-bonuses-reaction/comment-page-1#comment-63714 Persam1197 Sun, 28 Oct 2007 21:04:04 +0000 http://edwize.org/5525-and-voluntary-school-wide-bonuses-reaction#comment-63714 I think Joe Torre said it best: "It's an insult to think that I need motivation to do my job." We are working like widget makers in an outsourced factory. Recent retirees are smiling, well aware that they have left just in time. And there's more paperwork and assessments coming down the pike. What's interesting is that we're actually providing less instructional time to our kids with all this nonsense. The plan outlined by the UFT is nothing less than misguided. I think Joe Torre said it best: “It’s an insult to think that I need motivation to do my job.”

We are working like widget makers in an outsourced factory. Recent retirees are smiling, well aware that they have left just in time. And there’s more paperwork and assessments coming down the pike. What’s interesting is that we’re actually providing less instructional time to our kids with all this nonsense.

The plan outlined by the UFT is nothing less than misguided.

]]> By: Steve Pullano http://www.edwize.org/5525-and-voluntary-school-wide-bonuses-reaction/comment-page-1#comment-63557 Steve Pullano Thu, 25 Oct 2007 18:09:22 +0000 http://edwize.org/5525-and-voluntary-school-wide-bonuses-reaction#comment-63557 All of this is just fine and dandy in the make believe world that these "aristocrats" live in. It is not the real world. In the real world we have administrators who hire their friends and relatives. In the real world the more competent you are the more you get to do and the less competent you are the less you get to do. In the real world it is not how good of a teacher you are but whether you are liked by others who may perceive you as a threat or because you don't have the same beliefs as they do. Why not have the input of the young people in this. They are the "customer/consumer" in this new business model. Or is their opinion not valued.The entire concept is flawed. Being judged by individuals who have their personal agendas in place instead of the greater good is just asking for trouble. In the real world we have administrators who buy into the latest learning craze because they are told to. Posting endless sheets of notes on the walls and post its on them is insane. Yet we are told we must do it by some wonk downtown who has probalby never taught a day. Yet we are to belive that this is a good idea. It was probably the only way to get the 25-55 pension reform in but it is really just a spoonful of medicine to help the poison go down.I am ashamed to say it but this is not a solidarity stance. We need to clean up our profession and that means getting the educrats to understand that what we do is more than just teach a subject. In the real world we nurture the forgotten encourage the forlorn and console the damaged-all of whom are a result of societial apathy. To say we would do more or better or be more involved because of money is a pathetic commentary on modern day society and to tie it to a test is just plain short sighted and destructive. All of this is just fine and dandy in the make believe world that these “aristocrats” live in. It is not the real world.

In the real world we have administrators who hire their friends and relatives. In the real world the more competent you are the more you get to do and the less competent you are the less you get to do.

In the real world it is not how good of a teacher you are but whether you are liked by others who may perceive you as a threat or because you don’t have the same beliefs as they do.

Why not have the input of the young people in this.
They are the “customer/consumer” in this new business model. Or is their opinion not valued.The entire concept is flawed. Being judged by individuals who have their personal agendas in place instead of the greater good is just asking for trouble.

In the real world we have administrators who buy into the latest learning craze because they are told to. Posting endless sheets of notes on the walls and post its on them is insane. Yet we are told we must do it by some wonk downtown who has probalby never taught a day. Yet we are to belive that this is a good idea.

It was probably the only way to get the 25-55 pension reform in but it is really just a spoonful of medicine to help the poison go down.I am ashamed to say it but this is not a solidarity stance. We need to clean up our profession and that means getting the educrats to understand that what we do is more than just teach a subject.

In the real world we nurture the forgotten encourage the forlorn and console the damaged-all of whom are a result of societial apathy. To say we would do more or better or be more involved because of money is a pathetic commentary on modern day society and to tie it to a test is just plain short sighted and destructive.

]]> By: Steve Perez http://www.edwize.org/5525-and-voluntary-school-wide-bonuses-reaction/comment-page-1#comment-63469 Steve Perez Tue, 23 Oct 2007 21:26:44 +0000 http://edwize.org/5525-and-voluntary-school-wide-bonuses-reaction#comment-63469 Test scores will be one way progress in a school is measured, but not the only measure. And progress will be measured school-wide, not by teacher. That will give teachers in a school incentive to work together, rather than giving them incentive to compete, which is what individual merit pay does. Will it work? We agree that it will work in schools that already collaborate. One thing the pilot program tests is whether incentives will encourage schools to collaborate so they get to that point. Test scores will be one way progress in a school is measured, but not the only measure. And progress will be measured school-wide, not by teacher. That will give teachers in a school incentive to work together, rather than giving them incentive to compete, which is what individual merit pay does. Will it work? We agree that it will work in schools that already collaborate. One thing the pilot program tests is whether incentives will encourage schools to collaborate so they get to that point.

]]> By: jd2718 http://www.edwize.org/5525-and-voluntary-school-wide-bonuses-reaction/comment-page-1#comment-63416 jd2718 Sun, 21 Oct 2007 00:13:16 +0000 http://edwize.org/5525-and-voluntary-school-wide-bonuses-reaction#comment-63416 It's two people in covered titles, whether or not they are actually UFT members. I don't know why we included agency fee payers. Jonathan It’s two people in covered titles, whether or not they are actually UFT members. I don’t know why we included agency fee payers.

Jonathan

]]> By: mevans212 http://www.edwize.org/5525-and-voluntary-school-wide-bonuses-reaction/comment-page-1#comment-63385 mevans212 Fri, 19 Oct 2007 23:33:05 +0000 http://edwize.org/5525-and-voluntary-school-wide-bonuses-reaction#comment-63385 ILuvteaching, why would your school vote to be in the bonus program? ILuvteaching, why would your school vote to be in the bonus program?

]]> By: firebrand http://www.edwize.org/5525-and-voluntary-school-wide-bonuses-reaction/comment-page-1#comment-63371 firebrand Fri, 19 Oct 2007 03:12:38 +0000 http://edwize.org/5525-and-voluntary-school-wide-bonuses-reaction#comment-63371 I have the exact same fears...I guess we'll have to "wait and see". I think we're in the minority. I have the exact same fears…I guess we’ll have to “wait and see”. I think we’re in the minority.

]]> By: ILuvteaching http://www.edwize.org/5525-and-voluntary-school-wide-bonuses-reaction/comment-page-1#comment-63358 ILuvteaching Thu, 18 Oct 2007 23:21:03 +0000 http://edwize.org/5525-and-voluntary-school-wide-bonuses-reaction#comment-63358 I'm against the whole idea. It is a defacto acceptance of the NCLB principle that test scores are the only way to measure growth. I don't get how I just got another e-mail urging me to fax a letter to congress against merit pay in NCLB, yet here we are giving it a foot hold in our schools. Whatever happened to equal pay for equal work, the most basic principle of unionism? Under this agreement I could work myself to death, but if my students don't do as well as the teacher across the hall, well potentially tough noogies on me! (did I just actually write tough noogies?) I know you will likely write in response something like "this won't happen in a school where there is good collaboration between administration and teachers...blah, blah, blah." Great idea in principle, but not reality. So far every article or post written by a union member reads a "A team, made up of teachers and administrators", but my understanding is the actual language in the agreement is very clear. The 4 people are: 1. The Principal 2. An Assistant Principal 3 & 4. 2 union members elected teachers. First why not just write this? It reeks of deception and second how much influence can anyone reasonably believe regular teachers will have over their Principal and AP? I sit on a few different "committees in my school". The meetings all follow the same formula. My Principal tells us what she/he plans on doing and we get to node approval. If anyone does have a different view the response is usually thanks I'll consider that, then she/he does what they want. Before you respond to this with any comments about my Principal you should know Randi has visited my school and lavished it with praises about what a wonderful example of collaborative spirit it is. As for the argument that this is not individual merit pay? A committee of 4 gets to determine whom and how much each and every person gets. How is this so much different than individual merit pay? I know the arguments, but come on. I’m against the whole idea. It is a defacto acceptance of the NCLB principle that test scores are the only way to measure growth. I don’t get how I just got another e-mail urging me to fax a letter to congress against merit pay in NCLB, yet here we are giving it a foot hold in our schools. Whatever happened to equal pay for equal work, the most basic principle of unionism? Under this agreement I could work myself to death, but if my students don’t do as well as the teacher across the hall, well potentially tough noogies on me! (did I just actually write tough noogies?) I know you will likely write in response something like “this won’t happen in a school where there is good collaboration between administration and teachers…blah, blah, blah.” Great idea in principle, but not reality. So far every article or post written by a union member reads a “A team, made up of teachers and administrators”, but my understanding is the actual language in the agreement is very clear. The 4 people are: 1. The Principal 2. An Assistant Principal 3 & 4. 2 union members elected teachers. First why not just write this? It reeks of deception and second how much influence can anyone reasonably believe regular teachers will have over their Principal and AP? I sit on a few different “committees in my school”. The meetings all follow the same formula. My Principal tells us what she/he plans on doing and we get to node approval. If anyone does have a different view the response is usually thanks I’ll consider that, then she/he does what they want. Before you respond to this with any comments about my Principal you should know Randi has visited my school and lavished it with praises about what a wonderful example of collaborative spirit it is. As for the argument that this is not individual merit pay? A committee of 4 gets to determine whom and how much each and every person gets. How is this so much different than individual merit pay?
I know the arguments, but come on.

]]>