Chicago bled dry.................

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/31 ... john-fund#

"The smartest parents in Chicago right now are those whose kids attend charter schools, private schools, or parochial schools. Those institutions don’t employ Chicago’s unionized public-school teachers, who went out on strike this morning for the first time in 25 years.

The coverage of the strike has obscured some basic facts. The money has continued to pour into Chicago’s failing public schools in recent years. Chicago teachers have the highest average salary of any city at $76,000 a year before benefits. The average family in the city only earns $47,000 a year. Yet the teachers rejected a 16 percent salary increase over four years at a time when most families are not getting any raises or are looking for work.
".............

SOP for unions, "...you owe us whatever we demand because we say so." In the meanwhile who suffers? The kids who are stuck in the public education system, now they aren't even learning incorrect information as presented by their teachers, they are sitting around the house (assuming Mommy and Daddy aren't using the public school system for day care) learning nothing.

Blazer Bob wrote: Chicago teachers have the highest average salary of any city at $76,000 a year before benefits. The average family in the city only earns $47,000 a year.
".............

"With an average annual salary of $76,000, Chicago teachers are among the highest-paid in the nation, according to the National Council on Teacher Quality.

Read more: http://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/C ... z268950l6e

big difference when one states their salary is AMONG the highest and stating it IS the highest. Chicago isn't exactly a cheap place to live, much like NYC or LA. And comparing a professional's salary to what the average family makes is silly.....Teachers are highly educated and for the most part underpaid for their level of education. But from what I have read this strike is more about other issues, like linking pay raises to students scores and class size. I would rather the performance of a teacher be evaluated by their peers or the principal than student scores alone, those are highly suspect, and you will force teachers to teach to the tests rather than teaching so students actually learn.

archer wrote: [ I would rather the performance of a teacher be evaluated by their peers or the principal than student scores alone, those are highly suspect, and you will force teachers to teach to the tests rather than teaching so students actually learn.

Highly suspect? When a large # of recent high school graduates can not get a score of 24 in order to qualify to enlist in the military, that is not suspect that is criminal negligence.

I agree that our education system is failing our children....be it Chicago or Denver.......but I don't put all the blame on teachers making too much money. We have bloated administrations with less money going to the classroom and more money going to overhead. Teacher pay is far too low to attract the best and the brightest into the profession, especially in math and science. It's too easy to blame teachers and the unions for our failure to build a well balanced education system, cutting teacher pay and benefits such that no one wants to teach anymore, or can afford to teach, isn't going to improve our schools. A complete overhaul of how we teach, and effective use of technology, would have a larger positive effect.

archer wrote: I agree that our education system is failing our children....be it Chicago or Denver.......but I don't put all the blame on teachers making too much money. We have bloated administrations with less money going to the classroom and more money going to overhead. Teacher pay is far too low to attract the best and the brightest into the profession, especially in math and science. It's too easy to blame teachers and the unions for our failure to build a well balanced education system, cutting teacher pay and benefits such that no one wants to teach anymore, or can afford to teach, isn't going to improve our schools. A complete overhaul of how we teach, and effective use of technology, would have a larger positive effect.

I mostly agree with that. :woo hoo:

Teachers are professionals? How many professional white collar workers are represented by unions?

Interesting to see the Rahm (D) disagrees with the strike. And that the teacher's union would choose to embarass the President right before the election

archer wrote: I would rather the performance of a teacher be evaluated by their peers or the principal than student scores alone, those are highly suspect, and you will force teachers to teach to the tests rather than teaching so students actually learn.

I'm not sure how teacher perfomance can be honestly evaluated by their peers. Seems to me that teachers, like most other like-professions, stick together and want to make as much money and get as many benefits as possible. They know that 'eating their own' is not a great way to meet that end.

If you see a headline llike this:

U.S. Department of Education: 79% of Chicago 8th Graders Not Proficient in Reading

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/us-depa ... nt-reading
Does it concern you at all that these teachers may not be reviewing each other properly? These teachers are among the highest paid in the country, yet the results are in the lowest. Guess the taxpayers of Chicago should just blindly pump more money in 'hoping' for a better change. These teachers need to shift their concerns from their own interests and focus on the iinterests of the failing students. That way they can justly demand more and the people may have more empathy for their situation.

FredHayek wrote: Teachers are professionals? How many professional white collar workers are represented by unions?

Pilots, air traffic controllers, paramedics, really, since when did being a union member preclude someone from being a professional?

archer wrote:

FredHayek wrote: Teachers are professionals? How many professional white collar workers are represented by unions?

Pilots, air traffic controllers, paramedics, really, since when did being a union member preclude someone from being a professional?

Professionals don't typically like collective pay. Most professionals want to make whatever $$ they are worth.

Collective pay limits excellence...since you can't be paid more than anyone else, why try. I know some people will still do so, but most will not.

If teachers were paid based on their ability to teach kids, we would have a lot more excellent teachers, and a lot fewer inept ones. Right now they get the same pay regardless of whether or not their students excel, or even learn the basics.