No Merit for Teachers Part 3

I understand that union based laborers think they are entitled, and they should get exactly what they ask for. Seeing as this thought process has impeded negotiations with the Nashua Teachers Union and the city of Nashua, I have a better idea. Why not run the school more like a business and pay teachers based on the good (and hard) work they do? Keep in mind you already have a system in place for merit pay that does NOT include student evaluations. In the work force, the worker has a supervisor, who has a manager, who has another boss and so on. In the school, a teacher has a department head, who has an academy head, who may have a vice principal who has a principal (do I have to keep going, or can I stop at principal?). So as we see the structure is very similar.

In the work force, the supervisor watches and evaluates the work being done at the most intimate level. The input of the supervisor is very important to the evaluation of the worker. The manager is the boss of the supervisor, and is responsible for the evaluation of and for the supervisors. Hence the manager is the balance for a fair evaluation of the teacher by the supervisor. Further, the final decision on increases is made a step removed from the worker (IE manager or higher).

Teachers tell students to think outside the box, please apply such advice here. Now if you insert the word "teacher" for the word "worker" and "department head" for "supervisor" (and so on) you will see how this structure falls into place. Your ability to perform with the students you have (whether they are top of the class or future drop-outs) would be evaluated by your department head. Your department head has been in your shoes, and is still in the classroom. Because they are responsible for the same job as a teacher, they know how difficult teaching is. The department head is in the best position to give a teacher a fair evaluation. Administration then reviews the evaluation and you receive the increases due to you for your performance with your students. Not only will this style of management work, but it has been working for decades in the modern business world.

Now to be preemptive, I know the department head has classes to teach, and can not be in your classroom everyday to watch you work. They do not need to be over your shoulder to evaluate your abilities. In the work force, there are many times I have had to evaluate employees with whom I saw two or three times a weeks. They were judged the same way as employees who I saw on a daily basis; their ability to show up and complete their job. Margins we added to all employees to allow for intricacies of their respective position. These margins also allow for issues relating to individual positions. For a teacher, this would account for teaching students of differing calibers. The margin of error for a supervisor is limited by the adequacy of the supervisor and their respective boss. In other words, if you could not "cut the mustard" in the position you hold, you would not retain your post. This system adds accountability to your boss, not just you. You are held to a standard, and so is the management; Perform or move on.

To sum up my idea, if you are a good teacher, you would reap the benefits of a higher salary, and compensations would not be such a burden on your paycheck. You would be wealthier if you are an "above and beyond" teacher. On the flip side, you would hate merit pay if you are a "do nothing" teacher who feels you are entitled. If you teach economics, think about the "free market system" and how competition breeds greatness. If you know you can make more money by working smarter, you're going to put more effort into your job. On the flip side, you also know that if you do nothing, you are not going to get the compensation you desire and may lose your job. This is fair. In the work place you must perform you duties or lose your job. The better you perform, the higher your compensation at time of review.

I want the teachers to have a fair contract, and I would love for them to receive past due compensation. But if you're going to take things out on my kids (the ones I am currently teaching) then I have no pity for your situation. I have proposed an idea that I think is fair, though it would need to be fine tuned. Consider it a viable framework and think of a way to expand and adjust it as needed. I am more then willing to work with any suggestions you have, and I am full of ideas. Problem solving is a gift of mine.

No Merit for Teachers Part 2

I have always been good with a quick quote. This is the one I had for the end of the aldermanic meeting last night: "As a teacher, you will witness temper tantrums, hear people shouting out of turn, stamping their feet, and generally being disrespectful … then there are the children." The teachers of Nashua have yet again showed how indignant they can be. As a public display, the teachers decided to throw their temper tantrum to sway public opinion. Public opinion is everything for the teachers, and they are not doing anything to their credit.

At this point, I am going to give the teachers some sound advice. First and foremost, we know you want a contract but slighting our children is not going to get you a contract any faster. Second, find a better way to get the money you want in the new contract. The teachers want retroactive pay for increases they have not received. I agree with the teachers. They should receive the past due income. But here's the question: In the next contract, when the teachers want to pay less health care and get higher raises, do we just give it to them? Should we give in to the extortion tactics of the teachers for new every contract? I say we make the teachers earn their pay the same way as the rest of us. Merit pay would make the good teachers better and the bad teachers quit. Our educational system would be the best one in the state because only the good teachers would continue to work here.

The teachers who have approached me over the contract issue all have one thing in common; they agree with me. They all agree that the contracts need to be settled equitably for both sides (I don't know the solution, but I have some great ideas like merit pay). The other area we agree is that the students are being affected. We disagree about the severity of the affects on the students. I have stated that the teachers are hampering the students' ability to excel in their studies. Teachers think I am blowing this out of proportion. I will let you be the judge.

Before the teachers adopted the "work to rule" ethics, I tutored some students from Nashua. Most of my tutoring was simple touch up work and brushing up on skills. Today I am teaching entire lesson plans to students because they do not understand their schoolwork. In my eyes, this is absolute proof of the effect on the students at the high school level. I might be 100% wrong, and the kids I am tutoring could be the problem, but I doubt it. I believe that if students require me to be a teacher, the "work to rule" ethic is having an adverse affect on our students.

Alright Nashua and others, tell me your thoughts. Are our children dumber, or are the teachers robbing them of precious instruction that is vital to a child's educational success? Who is really being hurt, the teachers or the students? If you agree with me, stomp you feet in a childish tantrum!

No Merit for Teachers

Teachers' contracts in Nashua have been a major grip of mine over the past 12 months. I have no problem with sitting down and finding a mutually beneficial contract for the teachers of Nashua and the town of Nashua. The problem I have is with the tactics of the teacher's union and teacher's application of those tactics. For some reason, the union and teachers have decided that the best course of action to take would be to extort the tax payers of Nashua. They are using the quality of our children's education to force a new contract. Many people have been asking me how I can make such bold accusations and I have told them all the same thing; because it is true.

The definition of extortion that best fit the description of the teacher actions is the crime of obtaining money or some other thing of value by the abuse of one's office or authority. Though I think this is pretty self explanatory, let's break this down and explore the application of the definition.

Crime; the abject neglect the teachers have for students I consider to be a crime. You will understand this point a bit later as I describe the neglect I have been witness to and have heard from the children I work with from the schools. A quick way to explain my observations would be to say I have to teach the students because the teachers are not taking the time to teach the necessary concepts to the children.

The second part is to obtain money or some other thing of value; In this case, the teachers are trying to get both. The teachers are seeking money in the new contract, and also health care concessions from the city. Granted, health care does fall under the money angle, but I don't want to lose sight of the healthcare piece. Further, I believe the teachers have the right to renegotiate their contract with the city, and have no issue with the renegotiation. The issue is the teachers have decided that they would sacrifice the education of our children to force the city into a contract. The taxpayers and children can not do anything to grant the teachers a contract. We have now become collateral damage in the fight between the city officials and the teachers, further our children have become pawns in the chess game the teachers are playing.

The last part of the definition states; abuse of one's office or authority. Earlier I alluded to neglect, and this is where it fits in. The abuse in this statement is the mannerisms of the teachers toward our children and the neglect of the teacher's responsibilities. The teachers have pulled the "work to rule" card. This does not seem to break any laws, but I see it as a breach of duty or better stated, abuse of the power they have with the future of our children. A teachers' job is to teach subject matter to the children within their classrooms. This does not mean the teacher ONLY teaches in the classroom, but rather teaches those who are part of their classrooms.

Again, I relent to the teachers as they are only obligated to bring forth the approved curriculum and to present it to the students while addressing issues of the students during class. I have never known a teacher who would not make themselves available at another time for the children who need extra help. Should a teacher make themselves available for those who need a more in depth explanation? Every teacher I have ever known or worked with has met with students at times that were mutually agreeable outside of normal classroom hours. I admit the teachers of Nashua are making some effort outside of normal hours; they will only make themselves available on one day and time with no flexibility for the students. If a child is not able to meet with the teacher at the teachers predetermined time, that student will not get extra help from the teacher. The teachers do not seem care about the child's ability to be successful with their academics. The only concern the teachers appear to have with their students is using them in their extortion scheme. We could stop the extortion with two words, "merit pay."

Nashua teachers have no problem with our children slipping between the cracks and falling behind. By their actions, the teachers have proven to me that they do not care if your child gets a full and beneficial education. Why should the teachers care, they get paid either way. It might not be the exact figure they are looking for, but they still get paid. I forgot to add that when a new contract is approved the teachers will get their new pay retroactive. How are these teachers going to give our children a retroactive education? This is why I feel the teachers of Nashua do not care about our children: There is no way to give back the lost time. Time is the largest of the opportunity costs, and the students of Nashua are paying dearly.