A "hit-the-bricks" issue
A story in the April 13 Review noted that the East Liverpool teachers union filed a grievance against the district after Superintendent James Herring questioned some of the "professional development" hours turned in for $25-per-hour compensation. As I understand it, Herring let go of his initial opposition and brought before his board a memorandum of understanding that concedes the issue to the teachers. The board rejected the agreement.
If you have not read the newspaper account, I suggest you do. Be sure to read the comments in the Review version.
The story pointed to a case in which a teacher claimed "professional development" compensation for time worked at a concession stand. Board President Janice Martin said that in the past a teacher had been paid for "duplicate hours." Martin was one of the majority who voted against the memorandum.
My guess is that Supt. Herring knew going in that the board would vote against the agreement. All of the board members quoted in the story said they were against it on principle, giving them an opportunity to take the high road. By bringing the agreement before the board, Herring was able to draw public attention to the alleged abuses. And as usual, the teachers seem willing to play the fools as long as they get their money.
Having heard about just two alleged abuses, however, I'd like to know what actually does pass for professional development in the public schools--the stuff superintendents do not flag.
At the university level, activities classified as "professional development" include things like giving a paper and/or attending a professional conference, and professors must submit detailed documentation of their activities and expenses. The university might reimburse expenses, but no additional stipend is expected.
Active scholars--those who create new knowledge in their fields--can apply for the occasional sabbatical, but they are expected to produce genuine professional (typically published) results. Contrary to popular belief, the academic sabbatical is not a paid vacation. The system is highly scrutinized and monitored, and what qualifies as "professional development" is clearly defined and limited.
From what I gather, the public schools operate with a fairly loose definition of the term. If working a concession stand is considered professional development, then the environment is not professional. If a teacher can be paid for submitting "duplicate hours" with no repercussions, then someone needs to explain what that means.
Any way you cut it, taxpayers will be watching how this story develops.
If you have not read the newspaper account, I suggest you do. Be sure to read the comments in the Review version.
The story pointed to a case in which a teacher claimed "professional development" compensation for time worked at a concession stand. Board President Janice Martin said that in the past a teacher had been paid for "duplicate hours." Martin was one of the majority who voted against the memorandum.
My guess is that Supt. Herring knew going in that the board would vote against the agreement. All of the board members quoted in the story said they were against it on principle, giving them an opportunity to take the high road. By bringing the agreement before the board, Herring was able to draw public attention to the alleged abuses. And as usual, the teachers seem willing to play the fools as long as they get their money.
Having heard about just two alleged abuses, however, I'd like to know what actually does pass for professional development in the public schools--the stuff superintendents do not flag.
At the university level, activities classified as "professional development" include things like giving a paper and/or attending a professional conference, and professors must submit detailed documentation of their activities and expenses. The university might reimburse expenses, but no additional stipend is expected.
Active scholars--those who create new knowledge in their fields--can apply for the occasional sabbatical, but they are expected to produce genuine professional (typically published) results. Contrary to popular belief, the academic sabbatical is not a paid vacation. The system is highly scrutinized and monitored, and what qualifies as "professional development" is clearly defined and limited.
From what I gather, the public schools operate with a fairly loose definition of the term. If working a concession stand is considered professional development, then the environment is not professional. If a teacher can be paid for submitting "duplicate hours" with no repercussions, then someone needs to explain what that means.
Any way you cut it, taxpayers will be watching how this story develops.
posted by M. | 3:45 PM
6 Comments:
Good luck arguing with a teacher. Even better good luck arguing with a teacher's union. They'll rationalize anything to get their way, and if they lose, they'll cry real hard and stomp their feet and claim their jobs are as hard as those who work in the steel mills. And then they'll pass another levy and more teachers will utilize this professional development program and get paid $25 per hour to broil a freaking hot dog.
Teachers work just as hard as anyone else. Professional development might include "face time" with students and parents. If this is done by serving drinks or hot dogs than so be it.
Everyone likes to beat on teachers because we work less and days than other professions. But our income is less than other blue collar type jobs also. Don't forget that we had to pay for an education that removed years from our working life. How many of you would want to be in charge of your kids that come to school poorly prepared? We have to do it every day and not complain.
See? Told you. It's like fishing at a bass farm.
I think everyone would agree that there are competent teachers who work hard. If you are a teacher, you know better than most that this does not describe all teachers, just as it does not describe everyone in any job.
However, if you are claiming that serving refreshments and talking to students and parents is "professional development," then the term means something entirely different in the public schools than it does elsewhere. I can't even imagine an environment where teachers would expect to be paid extra for talking to students and parents. That truly is absurd. I'm sure my colleagues will get a chuckle out of your definition of professional development.
M,
I agree here. While there are great teachers who really add value to their students, there are also teachers who are there to collect a check. Hot dog stands as PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT? Give me a break.
What happened to the days of teachers talking to students before or after classes who needed/wanted extra help? I know of great teachers who used to do this for me and you can be sure they weren't billing it as professional development. They were doing it for the same reason they chose teaching as their profession, because they wanted to make a difference in kids' lives.
Nickels and dimes. The teacher unions are thug-like organizations. I understand the basic premise of having a union in place to defend the rights of teachers. I don't understand teachers hiding behind a union in situations when they have no leg to stand on.
If "seriously" is a teacher, he or she may want to take a refresher course on writing, just sayin'
Post a Comment
<< Home