When push comes to shove, pragmatism takes precedence over ideology...

While that's true of everyone here, to a certain extent, it's especially noticeable with you.

"The Force is strong with this one."
-Darth Vader, STAR WARS IV, A New Hope

:D

if their democratic allies betray them, they should start moving their money to the GOP. they may be corrupt to the bone, but at least those folks deliver for their benefactors.

Sounds like something I would say.. :D

Michale.....

the interesting thing is that a few years ago i would have disagreed. i would have said that it's not the same thing, because corporations advocate only for their bottom line, while unions exist for the purpose of advocating on behalf of their members. what i've come to realize by living among the cuban right is that lefty leanings muddy the purpose of unions.

although i do agree with many lefty positions, putting union money to work on behalf of democrats has compromised the economic purposes of those unions. while corporate management have bought politicians on both the left and the right, unions remain married to only one side, putting their membership and their collective mission at a major political disadvantage. essentially they've backed themselves into a corner. democrats can take both union and corporate money, and don't have to do much of anything for union members, because the unions don't have other options. if dems don't do what management wants, they have other places to put their money.

in a perfect world neither unions nor corporations would be allowed to influence politics. since that seems unlikely to ever occur, unions need to adapt. if their democratic allies betray them, they should start moving their money to the GOP. they may be corrupt to the bone, but at least those folks deliver for their benefactors.

I am on record as saying that any restriction applied to corporations should equally be applied to unions..

Your suggestion does just that and, therefore, I would have absolutely NO problem with it..

Hell, do away with lobbyists all together.. Institute a Federal Fund that gives each candidate X dollars and they are not to receive a penny more from ANYONE...

Yea, I know.. I know... Pipe dream....

Michale

no need to bow too much, it's not too hard to understand. for the reasons why standardized test scores are bad at evaluating the quality of a school, the link i provided actually has an outstanding three-part explanation. it also contains a superb analogy: trying to gauge school quality using standardized achievement tests is like trying to measure temperature with a tablespoon.

http://tinyurl.com/bmcj9jq

if i may stray a bit from the initial topic, the other thing that really needs to apply to both unions and corporations is a blanket ban on political spending. regardless of what the supreme court says, a group of people (with a collective agenda that may differ from the private agendas of its component individuals) SHOULD NOT be allowed the same political rights as a flesh and bone human being.

That seems to be the prevailing attitude amongst the troops on the ground...

Michale....

Unions have served a useful purpose in the past and they CAN serve a useful purpose again in the future.

But, for MANY Unions, they have become indistinguishable from the Corporate interests they were designed to fight.

Unions need to take a good hard and objective look at themselves and ask, "Are we part of the solution?? Or are we part of the problem."

There are good Unions out there, to be sure. Just as there are good Corporations out there..

But this country needs a LOT more of the good ones and a LOT less of the bad ones.

This applies to both Unions *AND* Corporations...

"Good talk..."
-Dr Rodney McKay, STARGATE ATLANTIS, McKay And Mrs. Miller

:D

Michale.....

dang, i fell into the "insufficient" trap too. standardized tests and statistical formulae aren't just inadequate for measuring teacher practices, they're counterproductive. because they're so narrow in scope, their use to measure teachers is extremely unlikely to be accurate, and is a direct incentive to create poor teaching practices.

also, you'll note i didn't disagree with you about union leadership. some are better than others, but exactly like you wrote, there's a HUGE divide between the interests of the heads of the union and its rank and file members. i think we need to preserve the FUNCTIONS of unions such as collective bargaining and enforcing due process. but one particular leadership framework shouldn't have the monopoly on serving those functions. they need to do their job right or get replaced by someone else who will.

Now, an argument can be made that the Union must serve itself first so as to survive to serve it's members.

That's a circular argument, devoid of any moral authority.

"You ask me if I should not preserve myself so I can carry out my responsibilities.

We become its tyrants!"
-Cadet Saavik, STAR TREK II, The Wrath Of Khan

What exactly is the, ultimately, goal of a teachers Union??

To serve itself, the teachers or the students?

Unless you're advocating for a better, less political and more professional union that focuses mostly on things like class size and working conditions, which tend to benefit students and teachers alike. If you go THAT route, i'm with you 110%.

That's EXACTLY what I am advocating..

The Union should be advocating positions that allow teachers to be GOOD at what they do. Not positions that make the Union profitable and the teachers happy...

But the Unions do much too much of the latter and very little of the former. No where was this more evident during the Wisconsin debacle. In that, the survival of the Union was paramount, the benefits of the teachers second and the needs of the students a very VERY distant third...

That's wrong. No matter how it's sliced, no matter how it's spun, it's wrong..

Michale.....

thank you for that. my point on the matter is that union or non-union does NOT determine the quality of education a school provides. being unionized at the very least has not prevented the achievement of nine of the top ten states in the country in education. this doesn't prove that unions always equal better education, but it casts doubt on the possibility of them as a particularly large impediment.

since many teachers are supportive of their unions, an attack on the EXISTENCE of a union IS an attack on the teachers. Unless you're advocating for a better, less political and more professional union that focuses mostly on things like class size and working conditions, which tend to benefit students and teachers alike. If you go THAT route, i'm with you 110%.

but the narrow focus on breaking unions is throwing some great teachers under the bus, and making teaching less and less appealing for anyone to want to do. teachers new and old need to be in an environment where they're well-supported, and need be judged by people who actually understand education (peers and principals), not standardized tests or statistical formulae which are far too narrow to adequately measure educator practices.

~joshua

Michale....

They came into existence to better serve the people.

Now, by and large, they only exist to serve themselves. One only has to recall the Wisconsin debacle to know this is true..

During my day, I was amazed at Union meetings. 80% of the time was devoted to the Union itself. 18% was devoted to Union leadership.. The remaining 2% was divided up between Union members, snacks and bathroom breaks..

I imagine that things haven't changed that much..

Michale.....

it isn't ridiculous, it's obvious.

romney is the poster-child for corporate management; of course he doesn't want union contracts in the way of profits. obama also wants to convert the heathen education system into corporate dollars, he just prefers to do so using their own methods.

~joshua

Yea, I admit the headline is pretty ridiculous..

Much like the GOP's "war on women"...

:D

Michale.....

this just in: pope declares war on atheism, calls jesuits "too beholden to science"

ROMNEY DECLARES WAR ON TEACHERS UNIONS...
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/may/23/romney-backs-vouchers-expanded-school-choice/

In the interests of Forum amity, I am not going to comment. :D

Michale...

So that brings us to the question "What can WE do?" Have to toot our own PTA horn a little bit here. For teacher appreciation week we sent home envelopes with 3 index cards and a little note with each child (320 students) The note explained that after a very unscientific poll, teachers have said the most precious "gifts" they've ever received were sincere thank yous from student/families. Knowing how busy everyone is, we provided the index cards and said if they can think of anyone else in the school - teacher or staff - who has had a positive impact on their child's life, maybe they can send back a little note for them as well. So all the envelopes come back with aboue 1000 little thank you's flooding the school - priceless! The best part is the teachers were overwhelmed, the kids felt so good about themselves for creating such an impact, and the cost to us was under $50. Sometimes the simplest things are the most profound.

- Jennifer

Damn ... I feel proud just to be related!

I'm not sure what frustrates me the most, the fact that schools are caught up in the wave of anti-government hype or the fact that educators are not involved in the decision.

Excellent article!
-David

education is the source of a great deal of tax money for wall street to tap into, so there's a lot of campaign money in corporate reform. as long as the president says enough of the right words to union leaders to keep them pacified, it's not as if they're going to suddenly start donating to the republicans. so, he's drinking at the fountain from both sides.

if i were president, the first few things i would do is scrap race to the top, grant states and districts unconditional waivers from all NCLB standardized testing requirements, fire arne duncan and replace him with a real educator. then maybe i could try and craft some policy to deal with the fact that a huge amount of education funding never reaches the classroom.

Lemme ask you something.

If you were president, what would you do??

And, as a followup, what's stopping Obama from doing that??

Finally, would it be accurate to characterize this issue as your "red line"??

Enquiring minds want to know.. :D

Michale.....