S.C. deputy filmed slamming teen girl out of desk, dragging her away

You are right. Every teacher in America is a member of a union and can go out on strike at any moment.

Now, where was that definition of "right to work" I had just a moment ago?

 

We send teachers into the classroom that haven't demonstrated the ability to teach:

Teaching Teachers To Teach: It's Not So Elementary

We don't treat any other professional degree like this.

 

The point was that non-union charter schools, like parochial schools, pay their teachers less and provide fewer benefits than do public schools.

The hedge fund folks investing in privatization are in it for profit. The model is to siphon tax dollars and space (rent seeking) while driving down salaries and benefits for teachers.

Weren't you a proponent of taking "successful" people from all walks of life and turning them into teachers?

 

No, Dick's been always in the pay them more camp. I think you're thinking of Stoney, but I coudl be worng.

 

I've acknowledged that you're always going to get a few talented people for whom it is a "calling," no different than sports writing or social work. But I've consistently said - to her, as well, which doesn't always go over great in our house - that most teachers come from the bottom 1/3 of their college graduating class, and that if you want to increase the talent, you have to increase the salaries. Dramatically.

You're the one who thinks law firm partners will flee to teaching, for $42,000 a year, if we just fire some of the ne'er do wells.

 

I read your comment the same way dick is, FWIW.

 

YF, what percentage, in your mind, of all the teachers in America, should not be employed? They are not doing the job their position calls. They need to be removed.

 

YF focuses on the teachers, but it's also systematic. The soft bigotry of low expectations. Like I've posted, if you're kid goes to a public school, particularly in elementary school, he or she is not going to be challenged. They are being taught to be good enough. Good enough to pass the proficiency test so the teacher can get her $500 bonus.

 

Of course.

We should let people who are proficient in specific subjects teach these subjects.

The current system has people who aren't proficient in a subject teaching it, and doesn't even make them show they are proficient at teaching anything at all.

 

I think we're closer to agreeing then.

I'm just concerned that if we don't do it right, we just end up with the same applicants, and we're paying them more.

The additional money has to be spent attracting better teachers.

 

Because someone is proficient in a certain area doesn't necessarily mean he/she can impart that knowledge.

 

You answer first. Is it higher than the current 1% that gets fired each year?