StrangeSox

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Sep 11, 2012 -> 12:16 PM) No it hurts everyone, because unlike a private sector job, schools are for the benefit of society. So when you have highly educated teachers who want the same job for less money, society is hurt when the union says no. Society is hurt when the school district is bankrupt and the union wont let it hire cheaper replacements. Once again, everyone wants a teacher job. But the union creates a system where only the select few ever get it and then creates rules to ensure that those select few never lose it. And maybe Id be a little more convinced in the system if we were going gangbusters and dominating in education. But we arent, so outside of teachers bank accounts, who is winning? Because this is who is not: children, tax payers, society. It doesn't hurt people already inside the guild. This isn't much different than ABA or AMA controlling bar and licensing rates to protect those who are already in. I'm trying to make as neutral a statement as possible here, not saying it's the right policy.

^^a good post edit: damn you soxbadger, that was meant for NSS's post.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Sep 11, 2012 -> 12:12 PM) Sorry for being unclear, I meant the stat about regular workers doing less than 2k hours. The stats I linked from the US govt showed every industry averaged over 40 hours per week. This is what I was referring to, According to data from the comparable year in a Labor Department survey, an average full-time employee works 1,932 hours a year spread out over 48 weeks (excluding two weeks vacation and federal holidays). It really pisses me off when news articles don't include links to sources. So lazy. I'll go digging...

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Sep 11, 2012 -> 12:06 PM) You may not be aware, but getting a masters degree screws you trying to get a CPS job. One of my good friends is very talented, she went to Smith for undergrad and got 2 masters at Depaul (education and history) before she even tried to get a teaching job. Her dream was to be a High School teacher. She student taught at CPS and the school loved her. But they couldnt hire her. Why? According to the contract they had to pay her X due to all of her degrees. She just wanted a job, she told them she would be willing to take the lowest starting salary. They said that it was not allowed because of the union. She is now teaching at a private school in the suburbs, making less money than a brand new CPS teacher with no extra degrees. It makes no sense. My wife specifically did not choose a master's program when she went back to get her teaching certificate. Allowing people to accept lower pay undercuts the wages that unions have negotiated for. It's guild-like protectionism and hurts some while it helps others.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Sep 11, 2012 -> 12:01 PM) It's buried in OECD data, trying to find edit: here, I'm pretty sure http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/eag_hig...eType=text/html here, specifically: http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888932310529 Tab "T_D4.1" shows that primary education averages 1913 hours, lower secondary averages 1977 and upper secondary averages 1998 per year.

man steve you sure are melting down in this thread

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Sep 11, 2012 -> 11:48 AM) Do you have the source? WSJ didnt link it, and I cant seem to find a comparable study. I keep finding work hours etc, but no luck. http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat23.htm That link shows that every full time industry averages over 40 hours a week when you include outside of the office. It's buried in OECD data, trying to find edit: here, I'm pretty sure http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/eag_hig...eType=text/html

Can we get a comparison of CPS salary averages to college-educated salary averages? That's more apples-to-apples.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Sep 11, 2012 -> 11:48 AM) Teachers want more for doing less, and it's been that way for years. Teachers want more for working more hours and COL to cover rising living costs. Anyway, doesn't everyone want more for less? Isn't that the way market forces are supposed to work, maximum benefit for minimum cost? According to the labor department survey, they work 99%+ of what other professions average.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Sep 11, 2012 -> 11:25 AM) Many of these teachers that have been teaching for years and years already have their preparation complete. There is a certain amount of foundation work that is done and then that is used over and over and over. There isn't a lot of new dynamic analysis being done of the Canterbury Tales or The Scarlet Letter every year. Algebra and Geometry don't really change after you have prepared to teach it for a year or two. When standards or curriculum change, you have to re-plan. But that doesn't really effect the Labor Department's survey that found the average hours to be very, very close to people who work year-round. There's still grading and planning revisions to be made, even if you're 20 years in. I didn't post that article to show how much harder teachers have it. I posted it to deflate the argument that teachers should be paid less because they don't work as much, because it turns out that, yeah, they do. You can rate them at least partially on student performance, but only if your metrics are good. Like you said, it's something that's very difficult to measure. The new standards rate teachers based on knowledge improvement, but is that being accurately measured? Is that the best thing to measure? It's a really tough challenge.

QUOTE (CrimsonWeltall @ Sep 11, 2012 -> 11:42 AM) If you trust the self-reported out-of-school hours, which I doubt most people in here do. The Labor Department survey relied on self-reported hours for everyone.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Sep 11, 2012 -> 11:19 AM) Yeah, so they spend that time in the classroom, and at most spend just over 1900 hours working a year. An average work week for the average person is 40 hours, though mine's more like 48. There are 52 weeks in a year. That's 2,080 hours, on the absolute lowest end. I don't get paid overtime when I stay past 5pm, I do it because I need to get work done. Boo f***ing hoo teachers, you almost sometimes, but not really, work somewhat close to what other people do with more benefits, more vacation time. God, teachers suck. Teachers average about 19 hours a year less than your typical full-time employee. Average employees don't work 2080 hours a year because they get holidays and vacations. The quote I pulled even went over that!

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Sep 11, 2012 -> 10:37 AM) 1) If you have $100 to spend, and the teachers want $99 in salary, that leaves me $1 on classroom resources and sizes. If you have 1 teacher making $75k instead of 3 teachers making $25k, that is classrooms that are triple the size. When money is fixed, you have to make tough decisions. 2) Yep it is their right to take the people of Chicago to the cleaners. And it is my right to convince people to go against them. There are consequences, and they may win the battle to lose the war on this one. Because many of my pro-union people are pretty upset at how CTU is going about this. Its not really been well received that CTU is taking on Rahm in Obama's election year. It really isnt the time or place, but if CTU wants to leverage everything for this, go for it. But you reap what you sow. Rahm is anti-union and Obama's done nothing for labor. Tight budgets didn't stop administration from giving themselves raises.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Sep 11, 2012 -> 10:33 AM) Aside from a publicly funded pension + lifetime health/dental benefits, you mean. We'll see if that pension is around in a decade or two. My wife isn't counting on it.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Sep 11, 2012 -> 10:27 AM) Isnt this what youve been claiming? That teachers have it so bad that they should be getting all of these benefits, pay raises, etc, while the rest of us struggle and either take pay cuts or get no raises? Much of what they are striking over is directly related to classroom resources and sizes, not teachers' pay and benefits. because they can still collectively bargain and have negotiating power?

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Sep 11, 2012 -> 10:24 AM) I went to school...so did you, including 4 years of college... You KNOW for a fact this isn't and has NEVER been true. I thought we were talking about CPS here? College isn't directly relevant.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Sep 11, 2012 -> 10:23 AM) Once again, you need to read your own post. They only spend 1,000 hours instructing. That is their job. You have been arguing that teachers spend so much time at school teaching, but now by your own admission they only spend 1,000, with almost another 1,000 coming OUTSIDE OF THE CLASSROOM, where they can, POST ON SOXTALK, and take MENTAL BREAKS. Their job requires significant planning and grading outside of instruction hours. I've been saying that, during those instructional hours, they're required to be more "on" than typical white collar jobs, so direct comparisons of hours may not be apples-to-apples.I had already said teachers don't work the same total number of hours in a year earlier in the thread. This isn't some new admission or revelation. But it turned out that I was incorrect, and when you factor in after-school hours, they work just as much as everyone else. So I don't even need to bring up that defense and can simply say that teachers work just as much as the average 40-hour worker does throughout the year, they just do it in a compressed schedule. In light of that, the argument that they only work 3/4's of the year and get all this time off doesn't hold weight. 52 weeks - two weeks vacation - 10 federal holidays = 48 work weeks.

damn it, I mixed up deliberate and intentional.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Sep 11, 2012 -> 10:19 AM) And that point was refuted by multiple people. It was pointed out that they administer tests and quizzes to their students while they sit on their phones and text. They show videos. They have reading time and study halls. Tests and quizzes are not given daily. Videos are strongly discouraged in many school districts because it's lazy teaching. Same with silent reading. Much more often than not, teachers are up in front of the classroom for 50+ minutes out of every hour they're instructing.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Sep 11, 2012 -> 10:16 AM) No one else does work outside of the office except teachers. Many workers do not. That's why it's the average full-time employee hours. When taking into account all of their non-instruction hours, teachers work about half a week less worth of hours in a more compressed schedule. No one is claiming that teachers work more than anyone else in this thread. You're being intentionally obtuse.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Sep 11, 2012 -> 10:14 AM) What full time employee only works 1,000 hours per year? Some firms expect attorneys to bill 200 hours a month (50 hours per week). That is 2,400 hours. Please read the rest of that post and the article for your answer!

QUOTE (iamshack @ Sep 11, 2012 -> 10:11 AM) This still isn't even a valid point...this is about a lack of internet access during their working hours. It has nothing to do with some increased level of output or some difficult task they must do. I guarantee you the level of analysis I do on a daily basis requires a higher level of thinking than just about any CPS teacher does in all of Chicago. So because I am also able to post on Soxtalk simultaneously that means they should go on strike? I mean what the hell is the point you are even trying to make? I explicitly stated what my point was several pages ago. It isn't about lack of internet access or the total level of mental difficulty of their job.

Some more background on how much or how little teachers actually work: http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2011/06/25/...worlds-longest/ So, even though they get lots of time off, they still put in almost as many hours as the average full-time employee.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Sep 11, 2012 -> 09:58 AM) Sorry buddy, but you made this lame point like 5 times in the thread. It was really a laughable point. The point wasn't "oh no, they can't post on SoxTalk!" edit: but keep the work-hours posts flooding in! There were 112 posts in this thread between 8am and 5pm yesterday.

statz skool is now in session