CrimsonWeltall

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Sep 12, 2012 -> 08:46 PM) Here's CPS's evaluation proposal from March http://www.cps.edu/SiteCollectionDocuments...nalProposal.pdf I believe the peer evaluation was to be performed by the "Mentor Teachers," so the "you scratch (stab) my back, I'll scratch (stab) yours" wouldn't really apply. I don't know what PTA1s are, but I'm guessing those are new-ish teachers. Certainly a 20 year vet isn't going to have a mentor teacher. It looks like most teachers would be evaluated by departments heads or administrators.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 12, 2012 -> 08:47 PM) The real problem is that there's nothing out there I've seen that really gives a good, fair, overarching scale by which teacher performance actually can be judged. The teachers might not have a good answer to your question, but when no one has that answer, does that mean they should settle for a bad answer to it? No, but should parents and taxpayers settle for a system where bad teachers are hard to remove because they can claim any rating of their performance is somehow invalid?

QUOTE (MurcieOne @ Sep 12, 2012 -> 08:55 PM) The current evaluation system is over 40 years old. It includes, I believe, a form that the students fill out that rate the teachers. In 2007, 98% of the teachers rated out as distinguished or above average. I guess they're not teaching the kids what "average" means.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Sep 12, 2012 -> 09:33 PM) They don't want to be tied too strongly to unproven standardized tests that may or may not accurately measure specific metrics of "student outcomes" and have margins of error of +/- 50%. That's a legit beef. But I want to know exactly what they want it to be, not what they don't want it to be. QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Sep 12, 2012 -> 09:33 PM) Thanks to the Chicago Tonight segments, I know that part of it would be peer evaluations. I believe both sides agree on that and having the standardized testing be a part of it as well, it's just a matter of how much and how rigidly. Peer evaluations? That sounds like a recipe for 'you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours'.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Sep 12, 2012 -> 08:16 PM) They're not striking over job-entry barriers. Their #1 concern is teacher evaluations What do they WANT for teacher evaluations? They don't want to be judged on student outcomes. They don't want to be judged by administrators. So what's the solution? Self-assessments? I'm doing a wonderful job!

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Sep 11, 2012 -> 08:59 PM) So that includes having the extra teachers? Even after that, they add the time too? And the additional days? Interesting. That makes for about an hour a day added, that would be like 15% increased time. It doesn't say that extra instructional time is on the existing teachers' workload. I think that time is for the new art/music/foreign language teachers who are supposed to be hired. It does say the existing teachers time at school is lengthened by 85 minutes, which according to that site is for additional prep time and professional development, which supposedly they're currently doing at home.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Sep 11, 2012 -> 06:54 PM) CTU's "bargaining update" from August 22nd indicates otherwise http://www.ctunet.com/blog/excerpt/Contrac...e_8_22_2012.pdf What does this mean? The principals aren't making the hires they're supposed to? It would be nice if there was some data about how many hires of the 477 have been made. I would not be surprised if they had not made all 477 hires in the few weeks leading up to the school year.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Sep 11, 2012 -> 06:44 PM) Well, as I noted, if you look at the Trib articles (I've clicked on so many now), you will see they are arguing about who they would hire for those slots. So, apparently, they have not been hired. The ones I've seen have all said that the city agreed to hire from the pool of teachers who were fired in 2010/2011/2012. http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2012/07/24/dea...public-schools/ If the city went back on that plan and the current teachers are getting a 90 minute lengthening of the day, I'd expect we'd be hearing way more about that from the CTU end.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Sep 11, 2012 -> 05:33 PM) And then they didn't hire them, and are now saying they can't. Back in July, that was the plan. NSS, do you have any news link about this? I can't find anything

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Sep 11, 2012 -> 05:14 PM) First, a lot of people seem to forget that the extended school day means teachers are working 20%+ more hours - so a 16% raise is still an actual step DOWN in pay per hour. They're not working 20%+ more hours because the plan involves hiring 477 extra teachers to work those added hours. High school teachers are going to be working an extra 14 minutes. Elementary and middle school teachers will be working the same hours as before. So it's a 16% raise for working basically the same schedule. http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-07...-teachers-union

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Sep 11, 2012 -> 04:44 PM) The Labor Department survey relied on self-reported hours for everyone. Maybe they shouldn't do that, because the idea that the average American teacher works 11 hours per work day is ridiculous. Think of every lazy teacher who does the minimum or uses the same lesson plan year after year putting in like 6 hours a day of legit work. There's a teacher putting in 16 hours a day for every one of those? That's like 8am to 2am every day!

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Sep 11, 2012 -> 05:38 PM) Teachers average about 19 hours a year less than your typical full-time employee. If you trust the self-reported out-of-school hours, which I doubt most people in here do.

Freshman year of college. I woke up and turned on the tv as I was getting ready for class. The first plane had just hit and, at that point, they thought it was a small plane in an accident. I headed off to class. I got there first and my professor was the only one there. I mentioned what I saw on the news and he told me that it was a big jetliner and NOT an accident. Crazy. The class in question had computers for every student and I spent the entire 90 minutes sitting there, refreshing Fark.com (most news sites were overloaded) for new information about what happened.

Are people who respond to polls just giant trolls? They have to be, right? Right? When asked, between Obama and Romney, who was more responsible for bin Ladens death, Republicans answered 38% Obama 15% Romney 47% Not Sure http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/201...ase_OH_9912.pdf

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 10, 2012 -> 06:12 PM) I can see the misleading Sun Times column now... "Cutler to Bears fans; STFU!" I remember when Cutler had to call that timeout in the red zone. He was pissed and mouthed "SHUT UP".

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Sep 10, 2012 -> 07:09 PM) It was meant to point out that they can't take mental breaks throughout the day like a lot of professionals can. Are you at work right now, posting on SoxTalk instead of doing your job? A teacher doesn't have that luxury throughout the day. Yes, they get more time off, but when they're at work, they're working, not dicking around on the internet. When I was in high school, teachers had office hours and if they didn't have a lot of students coming in during that time, they could chat with other teachers or be on their computer. Teachers regularly read books or magazines in class while we took quizzes and tests or did work. This was over 10 years ago. With smart phones and other mobile devices, I'm sure they can be getting quick fixes even more easily. Sorry, there's no way you're convincing me that teachers have no mental breaks. I'm sure it's not as many as those of us with sitting-at-a-computer jobs, but it's not 8 hours in a coal mine either.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Sep 10, 2012 -> 07:39 PM) I find it disheartening that the typical response to one group of workers having comparatively better wages, benefits, employment protections and bargaining power is for other groups of workers to tear them down, to decry them for not suffering like the rest of us. I think complaint isn't that they have BETTER wages/benefits/protections, but that they have UNREASONABLE wages/benefits/protections and the rest of us have to pay for them.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Sep 6, 2012 -> 06:38 PM) Oops. Looks like Obama has not wanted to cooperate with the Repubs as well. Sounds like the impasse is his fault as well. Guess there usually are two sides to every story. Read this. http://news.yahoo.com/fact-check-clinton-c...--election.html wut. Their example of Obama not cooperating with Republicans is a deal in which he compromised so much that it pissed Democrats off and yet Republicans still refused to agree...and that's both sides being at fault?

Layne Staley

QUOTE (Cknolls @ Aug 30, 2012 -> 06:24 PM) What attack? He stated a fact. That's all.

QUOTE (Cknolls @ Aug 30, 2012 -> 06:00 PM) So they shut the plant in 2009. I'd say the plant was effectively shut down in 2008 when 97% of its workers were fired and the remaining 3% were told they'd be fired soon. Do you find the firing of the last 57 people in 2009 to be the more significant event?

QUOTE (Cknolls @ Aug 30, 2012 -> 02:38 PM) Were they making trucks into 2009 at the plant? The plant was idled and finally closed in JUNE 2009. In December 2008, they shut down SUV production and laid off 2000+ workers. They also announced that they'd shut down the Isuzu line sometime in 2009. In April 2009, they laid off the 57 workers left who worked on Izusus. 2008 is the significant year, not 2009.

QUOTE (Cknolls @ Aug 30, 2012 -> 02:47 PM) Not following this post. Obama's big government bailouts are terrible + Why didn't Obama bail out that factory and help those people?!?

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Aug 30, 2012 -> 12:12 AM) Are you seriously taking this position? He's trolling you.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Aug 29, 2012 -> 09:48 PM) It is still avoiding taxes. No, it isn't. It's paying the amount the system intends you to pay because it's set up specifically to give those deductions. No one set up the system with the intention of people hiding money outside the US.