90 Percent of Chicago Teachers Authorize Strike

donsutherland1 · Jun 12, 2012

Hicup said:
I guess the fair way to approach this would be to take the average YEARLY salary and cross it against the increase in hours worked.

Using your example:

Average salary = $51,000 yearly
Increase of 2% = $52,122 yearly an increase of $1,122.
Increase in hours worked proposed was 40 minutes per work day X 260 days of actual in school work (Roughly does vary across the nation) = 174 hours (Rounding up) extra hours worked.
$51,000 / 365 = $139.72 per each day of the year regardless of whether they're actually in school working.
$139.72 / 7 = $19.96 per hour.
$52,122 / 365 = $142.80 per day worked.
$142.80 / 7.7 = $18.54 per hour worked.

Conclusion effective pay rate decreases per hour worked.

Exactly. There are numerous ways to illustrate that point. I tried to take the simplest, a strict hourly approach.

However, if the 2% increase is tied to the effective hourly rate of the teachers then the salary would be more than $51,122 as noted above. I did not read how the 2% increase was factored in. If factored into the hourly rate, then obviously the salary would increase and this whole conversation is moot.

In that case, I agree that it would be a moot point. However, as they receive an annual salary, one is dealing with a 2% increase from current compensation, not a 2% increase in the effective hourly rate that would be tied to the expanded work days.

Having said that, I recognize that Chicago faces some major fiscal challenges. The union will need to compromise, but the City will likely have to increase its offer. Its current offer is a 5-year contract with a guaranteed 2% raise in the first year. That's inferior to the last contract that was agreed with the police (10% increase guaranteed over 5 years). There's no indication that the City will even attempt to offer its police officers terms similar to what it is offering its teachers (guaranteed 2% raise over the next 5 years), much less ask them to increase their workdays by 10% in exchange for that compensation.

I am not in any way suggesting that the City concede the union's maximum position. Far from it. The City should offer reasonable terms consistent with its financial realities in exchange for agreement on reasonable reforms (preferably focused on increasing student learning outcomes that are truly controllable variables).

Khayembii Communique · Jun 12, 2012

So the city wants to increase the amount of time the teachers work while implementing an effective pay freeze/cut (2% raise in nominal wages vs. 2%+ inflation). So in real terms workers wages will go down as their hours increase, and the teachers are the ones being greedy? :roll:

Mach · Jun 12, 2012

Watching people deny that teachers have any impact on student performance is mind boggling. To think it's gone so far that it's the warcry of teachers that "we don't matter", "no give us a ****ing raise". Funny stuff. Sad too.

Khayembii Communique said:
You can have the best teachers in the world but if you give them nothing but rocks with which to teach children in a warzone where the children don't have motivation to learn due to the environment in which they live you are going to have poor student performance.

I don't know if you're just being facetious or are really that ignorant.

The question is not whether or not those hypothetical disadvantaged war-torn children will have overall poor performance, it's whether their performance will be improved compared to students in similar situations, who had worse teachers. How did you miss that.

KC said:
You cannot measure teacher performance based on student performance

nonsense

so how will you measure teacher performance?

I'm going to venture a guess the same way nearly every other organization, in every other industry, including private education, does. It may come as a surprise to you but out of the millions of jobs in the U.S., a great deal of them involve employee performance measurement, goal setting, evaluation, managers who make hire/fire, promotion/raise, etc., decisions. Somehow they get it right on balance. But teachers are fundamentally incapable of getting this right, despite everyone else, even private teachers, demonstrating that's absurd?

Surely your years in the marketplace doing training or receiving it, seeing co-worker performance and underperformance, as a manager, business leader, etc., taught you these really basic facts of reality right?

Khayembii Communique · Jun 12, 2012

Watching people deny that teachers have any impact on student performance

Nobody did that. Your entire post is a straw man.

ThePlayDrive · Jun 12, 2012

Mach said:
Watching people deny that teachers have any impact on student performance is mind boggling.

Nobody has made that argument outside of your imagination. The argument being made is that teacher performance is not the sole influence on student performance.

TheNextEra · Jun 12, 2012

Mach said:
Watching people deny that teachers have any impact on student performance is mind boggling.

Please show us the post where people are denying that teachers don't have ANY impact on student performance. The argument is that teachers aren't the only influences to a students performance.

The way some cons want to do things is strictly by test scores. What happens when a lousy teacher has a classroom where the students are supported by their parents and the students want to learn versus a good teacher that has a classroom full of students who don't want to learn and parents that don't care and/or don't provide a good environment to study?

Good test results doesn't mean the teacher is necessarily teaching good and lousy test scores don't mean the teacher isn't doing their job the best the students and parents will allow.

Mach · Jun 12, 2012

Khayembii Communique said:
So the city wants to increase the amount of time the teachers work while implementing an effective pay freeze/cut (2% raise in nominal wages vs. 2%+ inflation). So in real terms workers wages will go down as their hours increase, and the teachers are the ones being greedy? :roll:

"Greedy" is irrelevant, we can assume everyone is out for their own financial interests. The question is where they are relative to market value. If they are overvalued, they are simply being pushed towards market value.

Mach · Jun 12, 2012

ThePlayDrive said:
The argument being made is that teacher performance is not the sole influence on student performance.

Nobody has made that arguments outside of your imagination.

TheNextEra · Jun 12, 2012

Mach said:
Nobody has made that arguments outside of your imagination.

Actually when others want th teachers salaries based solely on test scores and graduation, yes, they are making that argument.

donsutherland1 · Jun 12, 2012

Hicup said:
I'm having a hard time with it because Don was incorrect with his numbers, the math looks a lot different when you factor in the actual school day which is 5 hour and 45 minutes.

I made clear in my example that I was using the 7 hour figure, which was proposed to be increased to 7 hours 40 minutes, to illustrate the concept of an effective wage cut. A starting point of less than 7 hours would increase the size of the effective wage cut.

It is not clear whether the average 5 hours 45 minutes refers strictly to in-class school time while ignoring additional work time for teachers i.e., conferences, grading papers, administrative responsibilities, etc.

That said, I would still tie pay to performance and NOT all teachers are alike and thus not all deserving of one show fits all pay scale.

I agree that not all teachers are alike. Moreover, certain fields have shortages for teachers e.g., currently in math and science, and I favor flexiblity for schools to offer higher wages, bonuses, or some other incentives to remedy those shortages.

In principle, I also favor some kind of performance component, but that's a challenging proposition. To design an effective performance component, one needs to establish broad agreement on what constitutes performance worthy of extra compensation, whether a degree of consistency should be incorporated (in other words the qualifying results should be repeated for multiple years to determine that they truly represent effective teaching and are not the temporary outcome of some exogneous factors), what variables are actually controllable, among others.

Mach · Jun 12, 2012

TheNextEra said:
Good test results doesn't mean the teacher is necessarily teaching good and lousy test scores don't mean the teacher isn't doing their job the best the students and parents will allow.

What idiot would measure a trainers performance soley on the students performance? That sounds like union propoganda.

Teachers and administrators (hopefully mostly experienced teachers filling those administration roles) should decide how to measure teacher performance.
Measure teacher performance is the only key I see being pushed here. And, having both rewards and penalties including firing, based on management evaluation. (Just like nearly every other industry including much of private education).

TheNextEra · Jun 12, 2012

Mach said:
What idiot would measure a trainers performance soley on the students performance? That sounds like union propoganda.

All I can say is I posted this question to Hiccup (a conservative):

TheNextEra said:
But does basing their salary on how well or poor their students do on a test an accurate reflection of the teachers ability?

to which the reply to it was:

Hicup said:
Why not? Do you have a better idea?

So, you judge for yourself.

ThePlayDrive · Jun 12, 2012

Mach said:
What idiot would measure a trainers performance soley on the students performance? That sounds like union propoganda.

Teachers and administrators (hopefully mostly experienced teachers filling those administration roles) should decide how to measure teacher performance.
Measure teacher performance is the only key I see being pushed here. And, having both rewards and penalties including firing, based on management evaluation. (Just like nearly every other industry including much of private education).

I agree with you. However, several people have argued that teacher performance should be directly measured by student performance and that's what people are responding to. Nobody is denying that teachers have impact on student performance. You made that up.

donsutherland1 · Jun 12, 2012

Mach said:
Watching people deny that teachers have any impact on student performance is mind boggling.

He's not making that argument. Teachers have an impact, but the impact is far from total.

If one runs through the economic and educational literature (I'm far more familiar with the former), one finds that the socioeconomic status of a student's family is positively correlated with factors such as graduation and test scores. Such students often have broader exposure to literature, culture, better nutrition, parental attention, etc., hence they have more learning opportunities. The extent of reading is positively correlated with crucial academic skills such as problem-solving and critical reasoning. Hence, those who have had greater exposure to literature have stronger skills throughout their educational careers.

If there is a single teacher who teaches two classes, one with students from a higher socioeconomic background and the other from a lower socioeconomic background, that teacher will experience disparate outcomes in those classes. One needs to isolate all exogenous variables and compensate for them in judging performance. That's not an easy task and it is the reason one cannot rely on "one-size-fits-all" approaches for measuring outcomes between schools. One can gain some insights from various measures, but until one drills down into the details, that insight is far from sufficient.

Moreover, the results in remediation near or in higher education have proved disappointing to say the least, meaning that the comparative advantages that are established early on typically persist. The gaps are not easily closed. Answers as to when the marginal benefit of intervention might be highest remain unclear.

Mach · Jun 12, 2012

donsutherland1 said:
In principle, I also favor some kind of performance component, but that's a challenging proposition. To design an effective performance component, one needs to establish broad agreement on what constitutes performance worthy of extra compensation,

How does the rest of the market overcome this challenge? It's routine in every other industry, why not here?

I believe this notion of needing broad agreement is exactly wrong. Private industry innovates and succeeds because it doesn't need broad agreement. It can actually get things done, correctly, because of the lack of bureacracy, and the need to "get broad political agreement". Once it gets too big, there are too many varied interests at stake and it cannot be about teaching, it's then about politics, power, pensions, etc. That goes for any organization.

What's worse, is all this evaluation is irrelevant if teachers cannot easily be fired, and if success doesn't result in higher pay/rewards. What even have measurement if at the end of the day you wont' be firing the really poor teachers? Or if you do a good job, yet your buddy down the hall is a slacker and you both get the same pay....how demotivating is that? Evaluation is part of a decision making process that creates rules, measures to the rules, and makes decisions based on that feedback. Decisions, like hiring, firing, rewarding, punishing. If there are no consequences post evaluation, the evaulation is almost irrelevant. Why even bother?

I do agree that it's unfair to make teachers just as vulnerable as private employees, while also not giving them the more freedom from bureaucracy that private markets enjoy. That's why both must occur.

Mach · Jun 12, 2012

donsutherland1 said:
Teachers have an impact, but the impact is far from total.

I agree, teachers have an impact on student performance.

The notion to only measure student performance as a basis for both raise/promotion or punishment, is obviously absurd, no doubt.

donsutherland1 · Jun 12, 2012

Mach said:
How does the rest of the market overcome this challenge? It's routine in every other industry, why not here?

By its nature as largely a public good, education isn't truly a market.

I believe this notion of needing broad agreement is exactly wrong. Private industry innovates and succeeds because it doesn't need broad agreement.

My point might not have been sufficiently clear. Let's say a business decides it's going to invest a sizable sum of money to allow it to produce a large quantity of Product X. However, in reality, only a few customers desire Product X. The firm will be forced to slash prices to unload its inventory, possibly losing money, and its investment would largely have left it with too much capacity for Product X. Those resources could have been better utilized for some other purpose.

A similar dynamic applies to education. In the absence of broad agreement (this runs far beyond labor contracts) as to what constitutes a practice worthy of added compensation, extra compensation will likely prove to have been wasted money. In fact, broad public consensus would make it easier for schools to transcend existing barriers to rewarding performance.

What's worse, is all this evaluation is irrelevant if teachers cannot easily be fired, and if success doesn't result in higher pay/rewards.

I agree that it should be easier to replace bad teachers and better compensate effective ones. Translating that principle into working policy is not as easy as one would hope or desire, even as the need for improved educational outcomes is growing more urgent.

j-mac · Jun 12, 2012

In reading through the thread, and taking into consideration that the knee jerk reaction is to join most people's sentiment in firing the teachers, which is impossible to do because of onerous rule, and procedure, not to mention cost of doing such with just one teacher, not to mention thousands. I would say choose legislation that is more tailored like WI, and go after these automatic raises, and such to bring budgets in line.

Teaching is a hard job, and not everyone, or just anyone can do it. But, with that said, it is not conducive to have public sector employees unionized in the first place, because this is what you get. FDR spoke about the danger of allowing unionization in government, and warned against it.

If the move is toward firing anyone, it should be the trouble makers that stir this greedy, selfish pot, that is aimed at enriching their own paychecks at the expense of the children they say they want to help, but really couldn't care less about when it comes to going that extra step.

j-mac

ThePlayDrive · Jun 12, 2012

j-mac said:
Teaching is a hard job, and not everyone, or just anyone can do it. But, with that said, it is not conducive to have public sector employees unionized in the first place, because this is what you get.

What have we gotten?

VanceMack · Jun 12, 2012

ThePlayDrive said:
They want a 20% "raise" to match the 20% increase in the length of the school day Emmanuel proposed and 4% to make up for the raise they didn't get last year because of mismanaged money. That's not even close to outrageous. If the city doesn't want to pay people to work a longer day, it shouldn't have a longer day especially when lengthening the day has no demonstrable effect on the quality of education. It's outrageous to think that you can tell people to work longer for free and then mismanage money to get out of it.

Its actually not. In modern times, it is an economic reality. It is very common for less employees to be tasked to do more work for the same or even reduced pay. And the answer is very familiar. "I'm sorry you don't think it is fair. I certainly respect your opinion and position. Thanks for your time with us and good luck in your future endeavors."

As for 'polls' where people agree with the teachers cause...theres only one 'poll' that counts. Thats the voter initiatives where citizens cast their ballots in favor or against paying higher taxes to PAY for those increases. Until that is the case and people are willing to put muscle behind their hustle, the 'polls' mean precisely jack ****.

j-mac · Jun 12, 2012

ThePlayDrive said:
What have we gotten?

Bloated salaries, entitlement attitude with the notion to maximize their bargaining position at the expense of the kids.

We the people on the other hand have gotten a sector that we entrust our kids education to, that is made up of largely self absorbed, self important, slackers that continually want more and more to turn out an ever worsening result.

j-mac

Khayembii Communique · Jun 12, 2012

j-mac said:
Bloated salaries, entitlement attitude with the notion to maximize their bargaining position at the expense of the kids.

"So the city wants to increase the amount of time the teachers work while implementing an effective pay freeze/cut (2% raise in nominal wages vs. 2%+ inflation). So in real terms workers wages will go down as their hours increase, and the teachers are the ones being greedy? :roll:"

Also, FDR wasn't against public sector unions. And even if he was, what does that matter? Why do conservatives love bringing that up? I love how you bring that up all the time in these discussions yet attack him for being a welfare socialist in every other instance.

ThePlayDrive · Jun 12, 2012

j-mac said:
Bloated salaries, entitlement attitude with the notion to maximize their bargaining position at the expense of the kids.

We the people on the other hand have gotten a sector that we entrust our kids education to, that is made up of largely self absorbed, self important, slackers that continually want more and more to turn out an ever worsening result.

j-mac

Oh, so we've gotten your hyperbolic opinion that's based on your own prejudices instead of any demonstrable evidence. I figured.

Hicup · Jun 12, 2012

ThePlayDrive said:
I agree with you. However, several people have argued that teacher performance should be directly measured by student performance and that's what people are responding to. Nobody is denying that teachers have impact on student performance. You made that up.

That's why statistics can be your friend here. We know that not all kids learn the same way nor do all teachers teach the same way, but when we put them altogether, and if we separate them by demographics and control for variables such as race (oh God forbid), ethnicity, age, location, region and any other important variable, we would begin to see a reasonable expectation of what is below average and above average, we, in-fact, find out what the baseline is. The problem is that, in order to properly find these baselines we muct include this average as a national figure as a State-wide sampling will not ALWAYS provide a reliable measurement.

So, as an example. If the national average for graduating students in districts where the percentage of enrolled black students is 70% or higher and the expected graduation rate of those students is 65%, then this is a reasonable expectation to apply nationally. Similarily, the other 30% being white (As an example of course it wouldn't be this way but for illustration) students enrolled and say their graduation rate was 85% we could use that as a reasonable baseline for performance.

In a nutshell, bad parenting need not be an undefinable measurment because quite frankly it is, but the sample needs to cross many demographics, and should probably include the entire nation. If we're going to penalize or reward good and bad teachers we should damn well make sure we have our baseline scales correct, and in order to do that we need to control for every conceivable variable.

Call it the "America First in Education" initiative. Start taking numbers, or if we have them already, let's start putting the numbers to good use, and begin the way back for American education.

of course the unions will oppose it, but hey, it can be done.

Tim-

apdst · Jun 12, 2012

Your Star said:
Filling an entire school districts worth of teaching positions within two months(and not caring about finding good teachers which you would have to do) is in no way realistic.

It's no more unrealistic than replaceing all the teachers who are on strike.

90 Percent of Chicago Teachers Authorize Strike

Less like the tiger...more like the lion.