Keith, that's nothing more than empty blather.

GOP Leadership at its finest!

Then you don't support teachers, because that's the exact population of a teachers' union. If you said, "I support teachers who are not part of a union," that, at least, would make sense.

Teachers UNIONS don't care about education... they care about $$$$ and power!

Teacher unions are made up of teachers. If teacher unions only care about "$$$$ and power," then, by your logic, TEACHERS only care about "$$$$ and power." What, exactly, do you think a union is?

I could be wrong, but aren't teachers required to be in the union if they want to teach at public schools.

Patrick - if you've ever been involved first-hand in a strike from the teacher's side, you'd know that unions are NOT for teachers. Teachers make up the members of a teacher's union because they cannot teach without being in the union, as Traci points out. But when it comes time to strike, the teachers are as much victims of the system as are the students. I agree with Adam: I support TEACHERS, not unions.

Also, you seem to assume that all charter schools are private, and that simply is NOT the case. There are over 25 PUBLIC online charter schools in Ohio, many of them state-wide, who are required to accept every student just like any other local public school, not to mention the proliferation of public brick & mortar charter schools. Now some public charters do have the ability to select students, like Akron Public's Miller South and Field's Falcon Academy because the demand for that kind of education is great and there are necessary limits (due to physical facility size) to how many students can attend. But please don't perpetuate the mistaken perception that all charter schools are private.

Giusto:
Now please give the taxpayer some "intelligence levels".
You know very well that any new Teacher comes into a school totally having "NO SAY" on what he/she gets in Pay. All of their table is already set.
Now, you are exactly correct on one thing.
Teachers and Unions in our current public school system are the same people.
But, the Vocation of a Teacher in a Private school and the Pay received "IS BASED ON THE FINANCIAL ABILITY OF THE PARENTS" to Pay that Teacher.

That, sir, is the big difference in "Vocation" motivated Teachers and "Union" Teachers.
Union Teachers have ZERO regard for the financial concerns of the resident's.
(Affordability of continued "guaranteed" pay increases without any Pay decreases is why the unions will face more repercussions.)

Adam C Miller is Correct. Support of the union Pay scales is not necessary in Education. People have alternative schools that have Teachers who do it as a vocation. Public schools have a place for the needy and the poor, but the union style of "greed" has reached "enough" only becuase most Residents simply cannot afford Union labor.
It's that simple.

Debbie S.,
I haven't been part of a strike, but I'm sorry you feel that way. I believe a strike is a completely appropriate method of standing in solidarity with your fellow teachers to say, "We know and work in this field, and we believe improving the conditions of this institution are more important than ourselves as individuals."

In terms of unions, no one can force you to join or stay in one; but it's complex, because you get all the benefits of the contract at no (or less) cost. So, it very much depends on your specific union as to the protocol for opting out.

In regards to your final comment, I made explicitly sure to state: "Not all of these facts apply to all charter schools, but these are concerns that any parent thinking of sending his or her child to a charter school should consider." Patch likes to keep these blogs around 800 words, and this was almost 1100. I also stated I could write a book on this.

This was not about meticulously detailing the pros and cons between public charter, private charter, parochial, and public schools. It's simply meant to give people a brief primer as to how charter schools, in general, are simply different. And those differences mean comparisons aren't absolute. If you don't consider the variables, it's hardly fair to make a statistical comparison. And parents who are considering sending their child to one should inquire about these things before moving their child. That's all.

Thanks for being polite.

Patrick,

I'm sorry I feel that way, too. And believe me, it's 180 degrees from what I *thought* unions were about before I walked a picket line in support of one decades ago. I won't make that mistake again. (Regarding opting out of the union - you and I both know that it never EVER happens, whether or not it's theoretically possible).

With regard to the nuances of charter schools, I simply hate to see all charters lumped into the same pot. Public charters DO have to abide by many (admittedly not all) of the same rules as public non-charters. I agree with your statement about taking the numbers with a grain of salt because the public charters with which I am familiar have LOWER test scores than their brick & mortar brethren simply BECAUSE they are accepting students who have traditionally struggled at the brick & mortar schools, which is the opposite of the picture you paint here.

Debbie S.,
Again, just to be clear: we're having a very broad discussion here. I defer to my earlier blanket statement.

I would argue that, if those charter schools are not competing with their public counterparts, that the reason is not so much the student population, but moreso because they do not attract and keep good teachers.

I can tell you, first hand, that you spend your first years as a teacher merely making sure that you're on message with the curriculum, and making good use of your time. You don't really shine as a teacher-- as someone who fundamentally understands a population of students, and as someone who can explain and connect that curriculum to students (well)-- until at least year three of teaching any given grade and subject.

And, frankly, if charter schools are going to pay salaries that are sometimes 2/3rds of their public counterparts, and then force their teachers to work longer hours for less money, then eventually those people are not going to make this a career. 40%-50% of teachers "burn out" in their first five years. And it is often a problem within charter schools that the teachers simply quit in the middle of the year-- public teachers don't do that for fear their license will be "held" by the district. Think of what that turnover does to the culture of a school.

So, I would agree that some charter schools who accept students who have failed elsewhere not because of those students, but because they can't keep good teachers.

Sounds like Adam only cares about $$$$ and power...and can't stand that he doesn't have either, yet teachers do.

Let me see if I can untangle this: The strike is about many things-- including the fact that public funding is going to expand for charter schools, while the Chicago public teachers have to strike to get a longer day, and make sure their kids have textbooks on day one. I have used that as a jump-off to simply explain the differences.

Teachers have to strike to get a longer day? Can't they just stay longer? Why do they need "new" textbooks? What in math, science, history, English, etc... Has really changed in the past year, or five, or ten for that matter? I remember having textbooks that were ten years old with all the previous students names on the inside cover. Somehow I managed a 1350 on the SAT and a 32 on the ACT.

MZ, Teachers are striking for THE KIDS TO HAVE A LONGER SCHOOL DAY. And some of the kids in Chicago aren't getting ANY textbooks on day one-- they have to wait up to six weeks to get them.

And I want to explain something to you: your education is not representative of every student's education. If you were so inclined to actually walk into a modern-day Chicago public high school, or a Cleveland public high school, or a Las Vegas public high school, and see what education has become, you would probably bite your tongue a little bit before making these kinds of statements. Your life on the student's side of the teacher's desk does not equate to knowledge or evidence of either the profession, or the institution of education, in the least.

Sorry for the confusion, it wasn't apparent in the original post or subsequent reply that the teachers wanted the kids to have a longer school day. Neither was it apparent that some of the kids aren't getting a textbook for up to six weeks. So is it accurate to say that the teachers are striking because of charter school funding, lack of text books, and the desire to have a longer school day for their students?

Thanks for explaining that my education is not representative of every student's education, I thought it was. How silly of me.

As for the remainder of your comments, you make quite a few assumptions about me. Perhaps to your surprise I have been in Cleveland public high schools (although not Chicago and Vegas as I am sure you have). I have also been in inner city charter and private schools and donate significant time and sums of money to both. I am not sure what statements I made that would cause me to bite my tongue, even a “little bit.”

Anyway, thanks for the chat.

Well I agree with Patrick on his "Life in Public schools today" "are not like years ago"
comment.
So I would welcome Teachers striking to correct those conditions.
However, Work up the problems and suggest the solutions ,First..
That's the way "Real Professionals" in all walks of life get the house in order.

Start defining the problems-- State the suggested solutions.

It is a problem all over the country.
It will continue.
My goal is to Spread the news , that America's Public school system is bankrupting the people who are now unable to financially support it. It's funding methods are obsolete. It taxes the poor, the needy and the childless barely able to pay their mortgages. That is very unfair to tell these families "Public school is FREE", when in fact it costs every year , the rest of our lives.
Not true in Private school Education. It ends after being educated.
Folks, That's the Truth.
So patrick, I'm with you on the schooling of past years. That's when Teachers called it a "Vocation" , not a "Profession" or JOB. Think about that!

Considering your ability to use capital letters and type comments that don't make any sense, you may be right.

it makes no sense because you are an overpaid teacher

Wait, Pat is a teacher?

Victor,
You can put the "you are as full of Barbara Striesand as a Christmas Turkey" pot-shots away. If you're going to try and insult me, at least call me a "bully" or a "thug." This way, when you're being a jerk, at least I know what the hell you're talking about.

Also, don't the rest of you have turkey on Thanksgiving, and ham on Christmas? I thought that was pretty standard...

So... teachers are BULLIES now. Ok. Got it. Just wanted to make sure I knew what type of person I was talking to here.

"Every time home values go up, teachers get the increase in pays." This statement in wrong in every way and CLEARLY shows your complete lack of understanding about school funding. When home values go up, total millage stays the same, so cost per homeowner DECREASES. Also, teachers are paid by contract, so home values have NO direct impact on teacher salaries. Sadly, your lack of knowledge is common across the taxpaying public.

Patrick & Debbie:
Patrick- Bullies come in many forms. Striking in September and Striking in June is Bullying the "children". Using the leverage of a forced Public education supported by a Tax pre-paid by residents should subject every teacher to automatic dismissal and replaced with another "teacher". Why , because residents paid their taxes up front. Taxes paid by many who do not even USE YOUR TEACHERS. Taxes paid by many CHILDLESS couples.
Do you get that? Do you understand who is talking here?
I believe My comments talk for a majority of Residents.

Debbie: 100% of our Public schools are funded by Taxpayer money. That is a fact.
If my home is valued at $300,000 I might have a school tax rate of say $5 per hundred. I might pay a tax for the school of $3,000. That goes toward your school budgets. If my house goes up to $400,000 in one year, my tax increases to $4,000 toward the school budget. That $1,000 more going to the school is spent 70% for your wages and the rest for the schools maintenance etc. .
(Now my percentages could be different &not exact, but the principle of Teachers getting their pay increases can only come from 2 sources.
1) Tax rate increases- which costs every Homeowner more Tax dollars.
2) Home value increases-- which also cost Taxpayers more tax to pay the disctrict.

Contracts are based "solely" on TaxRevenue. That's Home values.
Your raises have come from the Home-Boom.
Home values DO have 100% impact on your wages.

PaulRevere: You are making the erroneous assumption that I am a teacher. I am not and never have been!

And again, please educate yourself with regard to how school funding works. This is a good place to start: http://www.ohioeducationmatters.org/directing-school-funding-what-works/school-funding-landscape/how-ohio-got-here One piece of information from that site: "Since 1976, Ohio law has required districts to adjust tax rates to offset increases in property values caused by reappraisal. The Ohio Constitution prohibits districts from collecting taxes on the "growth" in property value."

Debbie: Property values have nothing to do with "Tax increases" for Schools makes no sense.

Assume A home valued at $100,000 in 2001 pays a $1000 school tax. Tax rate being$5.
Now that home in 2012 is valued at $300,000? Same $5Tax rate.

Do you actually believe that home in 2012 pays a Tax of $1,000 , just like 2001?
Or would that Home pay a tax of $3,000 as re-assessed for 2012.
Just where do you believe the additional School Funds come from?
How could Teachers get constant Guaranteed raises without raising taxes from the Homeowners?

1) Either rates go up .
Which means Home values stay the same, but more taxes are collected.
OR
2)Home values go up and rates stay the same.
Which means the school still get a higher tax because of the higher home values.

It must be (1) or (2)
As long as the schools "NEED MORE FUNDS" to pay the contracted wages.

State Constitutions use the similar language as Ohio Public school.

But, the Home valuation Taxation is pretty much Universally done.
Unaffordable school taxes have caused some Forclosures.

Sorry, But those are the facts.
Teachers can try to value themselves at $500,000 per year.
Justify their worth all they want.
The People and Businesses must be able to afford that.
If Parents can educate outside the Union scale at lower cost, they should be able to do that. It's Their Money, they earned it, not the Governments money to support what is becoming an overpriced Public school education.

Debbie:
One final comment.
The ohio constitution states that Public schools should be a part of every district and paid/supported by whatever tax.
It does not say "AT WHAT COST". Now that is a major voting power bestowed only on Every Resident in each district.
That is why our Teacher unions are being Bullies to the people who are paying them to teach. Striking infuriates the Parents.
The Post office is on it's last legs because the People had Alternatives (FedX UPS). That should be a warning to our Teachers and the unions that they belong.

Ed Fisher: Here is an Ancient question:
What came first "The chicken or the Egg"?

Let me ask---Who came first "The Farmer or the teacher"

Let me ask---Who starts any city "The Farmer or the Teacher"

Teachers are not the breadwinners of any City. They have always been a "vocation" need. It is the Public Education unions that come last.
Public education "vocation" Teachers come way before any Public education "Union" teachers.
Sir, you have it backwords.

Ed, just for the record, I read you loud and clear and it made perfect sense.

I suspect #3 could also be listed as "other", correct?

Ed, I have always appreciated your comments on my blogs. You always state yourself clearly and respectfully.

Unfortunately, as a teacher, I can tell you that this level of blatant disrespect is pretty standard. People say they support education and teachers out of one corner of their mouths; but out of the other, they have no shame in slinging insults at us if we ever should ask for a raise, or bring up salient points about flaws in merit pay systems, or the way we monitor student achievement. Then we're "overpaid" "bullies" who "fleece the taxpayer." All because we seek to say, "Hey, we know our jobs. We work in this field. We are experts at what we do. The state had to certify us to do this job, and we basically have to pay out of our own pockets to get a Master's Degree to keep it in the long run. We're not looking for the same kind of money Grady Sizemore got to sit on the bench all year. We're just looking to make a decent wage for a tough job, and for you to respect our input as experts who actually do it on a day-to-day basis instead of merely talking about it."

And people can disagree about how much money that should be, and how those adjustments in the profession should occur. Just know that I appreciate that you have entered that disagreement with a little more dignity and respect than some (even most) people.

Ed :
Let me make it simple.
You forgot where the "farmer" worker. ranks in your order of importance to the community.
You forgot that a City of Teachers, Firefighters, and Everyone else would not be a city , without "EVERYONE ELSE"

My position refers to GOVERNMENT and city services. Maybe I don't express myself as well as I hoped. The "everyone else" refers to the rest of the city support and government services. Not the citizens.

Mary JO:
If the constitution states common schools, would that include Free Lunches, Auditoriums, Sports Facilities? What is Education.
Also , if "taxation" is the means, one would ask --How much taxation?
Who would teach? At what Cost?
That is all missing and that is why the "unions" have entered and taken over a cost insesitivity to their out of range wages.

The constitution cannot legislate their Assembly to "bankruptcy"
So Let me offer that "Taxation" could be on the basis of Residents "Incomes" rather than their assets (Homes etc)
STATE Taxation of all incomes is much fairer than HOMES TAXED.
Think about it!!!!!
All of our Public school education costs would come down if our Teachers and their unions were funded solely from State taxation.

Did a fire start when someone over-cooked the Barbara Streisand-stuffed turkey you were were referring to earlier?

Lyn-
I'm sorry I wasn't able to post an answer to this question in a timely enough manner for you. See, I've made no secret that I'm a teacher in many of the blogs I've written for Patch-- and, as you've noted, it's public record-- so I really didn't think it was something that Adam couldn't have looked up on his own.

Still, I appreciate your proactive approach, and posting of those findings as though you were a sleuth who needed to publicly "out" me like I was some sort of felon. That wasn't the least bit creepy.

As for the remainder of your comment, I'm not sure what it is you're specifically trying to say. If it's that I *ONLY* teach six hours a day, then my response to you is: No teacher, worth his or her salt, only works six hours a day.

If you're making the point that Chicago teachers don't need to strike for a longer day when it only "requires" six hours to teach children, then you're dreadfully wrong.

The Chicago Public Schools are an extremely large district, with greater socioeconomic hurdles and skill gaps to overcome with their student populations than most. I would think it would go without saying that those students, on the whole, have more ground to make up than their suburban counterparts, and could use the extra time to do so. You don't need to be a teacher to figure out the correlation here.

Although, should you require a teacher to help, I'm sure you have the skills to find one on the internet.

Patrick-
It was not my intention to "out" you.
This was the second time that Adam asked, the first was above, 12:54 am on Tuesday.
Rather than just say you were, as I did not know, I gave my source, and stated I did not know if that was the same person - if another with the same name.
As you feel you were outed, I will delete my comment.
Also, my reference to 6 hours, if you read my comment closely, was I stated I did not know if that meant you were a teacher -because it seemed less than what other districts teachers work. So just maybe you might have some other position in the school system other than a teacher. You took offense to a jab where none was directed your way.

Where to begin?

First off, charter schools--on the whole--don't outperform public schools. And the ones that do tend to cherry-pick students (i.e. leaving behind special education and English language learning students--the ones that cost the most and start the furthest behind their peers).

Second, states with unionized teachers tend to have higher test scores than states where union membership is optional. Think about that.

Finally, the biggest factor in a child's success or failure in school is what's going on at home. The teacher does play a role, but it's dwarfed by forces beyond his/her control. Therefore the failures of so many students in CPS is NOT only, or even primarily, the fault of the teachers or the fact that they belong to unions. You put students that are currently attending New Trier schools (a wealthy district north of Chicago) and put them in CPS, and I assure you that the the achievement of those CPS schools that switch student bodies will skyrocket.

Let's clear something else up here: the median CTU salary is only $67,000. And that number is even inflated a bit by the fact that a decent chunk of the members of the CTU are college professors or administrators. Let's also remember that the cost of living in Chicago is significantly higher than the cost of living in Avon, Ohio. So that $67,000, in Northeast Ohio terms, looks more like $55,000-$60,000, which is reasonable for professionals with experience and in some cases advanced degrees.

And let's clear up one more big misconception: No teacher is only working six hours a day for 180 days. Between planning, grading, service days, building/classroom setup, continuing education, the hours add up quickly. We're not just talking about time spent in the classroom with the students.

If you think teachers are overpaid and that achievement is bad now, just wait until you completely de-legitimize the profession and the candidate pool becomes even worse than it supposedly is now. Who in their right mind would go into teaching with even crappier compensation (compared to similarly educated and experienced professionals), less control over curriculum decisions,even more stress, and an evaluation system that uses things that are beyond the teacher's control? Think again if you believe these ideas will actually improve education!

I wonder how many six digit pension are being paid there. No doubt it is a lot.

UH Resident:
If you really want to make things "clear", why not stop collecting Taxes from those parents who still want to send their children to Private schools.
It's always been that way.
There were private citizens always sending their children to their own local schools.
They paid their Teachers to teach their children. They did not ask childless couples to pay for education not needed.
Our Laws ask for "FREE Public Education".
(And that is the Problem)
Why is everyone around Paying higher and higher forced taxes for "Free Education".
Now Unions have made it "FREE UNAFFORDABLE EDUCATION", dancing and dancing with words like "Professionals", when nothing you do is "Professional"
1) Professionals Bill their clients for hours worked.
Professionals do not charge by how valuable a clients "House" is.
2) Professionals work all 12 months in a year. Many over 3,000 hours.
3) Professionals travel could be enormous.
4) Professionals Buy and Own their own Places of Work.
5) Professionals don't have build in Guaranteed contracts with COLA's
6) Professionals build up a client business, constantly changing
7) No Professional retires at ages 55-58.
8) Professionals all pay for their pensions far below what a teacher commands.

UH Resident --You are no Professional in the smallest way.
So stop self-evaluating your value.

Is he? I thought he was bowling (Barbara Streisand-stuffed) turkeys.

Well... I finally got that ham I was looking for in Victor's food metaphors. And now we have pie! I guess that means we've finally gotten to the dessert portion of this conversation. It's been delicious.

VM, PR, and others,
I teach in East Cleveland. I arrive at school every morning at 6:45am. I stand on my feet all day and teach teenagers. I teach 5 classes a day and every class has 35+ students. I eat my lunch standing up while supervising 300 students eating their lunches. I tutor after school until 4:30. At 4:30 when the students are gone I start grading, planning future lessons, making parent phone calls, and updating my grade book. If I'm lucky, I pack up my things and leave school around 6:30 pm. When I get home, I eat dinner and continue to grade essays, tests, and home work until bedtime. I have 175+ students and I have grading every night. I make under $40,000 a year. I owe over $40,000 in student loans. I have been teaching for five years.
I'm not complaining and I don't want sympathy. Everyday I wake up happy because I love my job. I love my job because I'm great at it and I know that what I do matters. I also know that the BEST and MOST EFFECTIVE way to improve the city of Cleveland (and this country) is through quality education. I could care less what your opinions of teachers and teacher unions are. This is a free country, and you get to say and think what you want. However, politicians are grossly overpaid. Can't you save your anger and outrage for them? Verbally belittling teachers is not a worthy endeavor. Also, it's offensive to your past teachers that you are using the reading and writing skills they helped you gain to insult them.

And now I've wasted 20mins of my 45 min planning responding to this nonsense.

UH, I can see from the comments that teachers love to wallow in "we have it so bad land" but let me try to give you the perspective of a salaried 4yr degreed IT person who has worked mainly in a hospital. All of us require continuing education and here's a big update for you "salaried" means no less than 50 hrs per week. That means all summer and MLK and Columbus Day too! Can you imagine, it's just short of slavery in your book. And, sit down, as you won't believe this: We have performance evals to determine if our pay grade goes up. Some people find they are not cut out for the job, still have the student loan and get fired! I'm sure you can't imagine such a travesty, with your tenure system firmly in place. And worst of all, you sit up on your high horse, demand more money from us, tell us that we "don't understand" how your schedule really is as long as ours and no teacher ever gets fired. You never listen to us yet YOU WORK FOR US. You should start listening. I think your moral example stinks so my child is in private school. I've had enough of your kind and the trend is going my way, not yours. You might want to open your mind and see what we see. Retired teacher taught my 40ish crowd.If you did a good job we should be smart enough not to be ignored. I think the better standardized test scores in public schools vs private just go to show that union teachers know the game. Teach the test and they'll pass it. That's not my idea of education.

Samuel Clemens:
I relly don't care how hard you wrok. Getting more pay in America does not come from Hard work , but comes from affordability and Competiton.
You could demand all you want, but the People must be able to Afford it.
Like everything else we buy.
So , go teach and get your $500,000 or $200,000 or whatever you Demand from a private school. Or build your own public school and see how many people could afford your rates.
You see Union rates are not affordable by any household today.
Unions are only used by Force.
Your wages come from TAXES. Taxes on individuals and businesses.
Forced taxes on ALL individuals, whether they have children or not.
Whether they send their child to be taught by you.
Public schools are unnecessary for many people.
Because, people have alternatives , your Pay is NOT a real indication of what you are demanding. My auto is a negotiated PRICE, just like your wages.
If I HAD to buy my Public service automobile that was priced at double the rate Paid somewhere else, then I should be unhappy.
Therefore, let those who choose private school costs exempt from paying your exhobitant Teacher value. It's that simple. See how much you can demand from those who want to use your Public teacher schools.
I bet YOU LOSE.

Pardon my spelling, I am just back from vacation. I do not have time to re-type or proof read. But, my points should be clear.

I'm not paid extra for my extra hours and work because I work in a charter school (An amazing school rated excellent by the state and reversing the achievement gap in Cleveland, but sadly these types of charter schools are rare as Pat pointed out) and although I love my school and the things we are doing, I have no union to guarantee I'm paid for extra hours . But that's not the point.

I don't do the things I do for money. Anyone who went into education looking to make money is, as my students would say, "touched in the head". I'm not going to argue with anyone about unions and striking, I have too much important work to do. All I will say is that teaching is an incredibly difficult, high stress job. We need to be attracting our best and brightest to this field (and keep them there) and we're not. Higher pay might do it but I'm not even asking for that right now. The only thing I'm asking for is respect. The tone present in many of the comments and here reveal a disdain and disrespect teachers the I find insulting and offensive. Tutoring starts now, so I have to go.

Mr. Clemens, you do realize that most people that are salaried employees don't get paid for "extra" hours. Small business owners often work up to 80 hours a week. Start ups live their business with the hopes that they might make a living and dreams that they might make it big.

Also, where do you think the colleges of education rank amongst virtually every other school at any university? Here is a hint, it's not the top. The best and brightest aren't being attracted to the field. As Patrick stated, often times the best and brightest aren't allowed to teach because they aren't state certified. My experience (admititdly anecdotal) was that the exception was those that considered teaching a calling. The rule was washed up kids from the other colleges that couldn't cut it and stoned out pot heads.

I find it amusing that I can and have taught at CSU but can't at a public high school. A degree in engineering and an MBA with years of experience in the real world doesn't qualify me to teach geometry or algebra?

So why don't the most talented get into teaching, perhaps because those same people would rather be awarded based on merit. I know I do!

MZ-- If I could, I'd like to reboot our conversation and do so with a bit of reduced animosity between us in the interest of calm, rational discussion.

Could you please outline for me the details of a system you might come up with that would accurately pay teachers for their merits? Depending on what your plan is, I might be able to raise the concerns teachers have with such a system.

Patrick, I have no animosity whatsoever. I don't get worked up very easily and tend to not get mad at those that don't agree with me. I have been both calm and rational for all my posts.

As for your question, why not pay teachers like most people are paid? Use both quantitate measure (test scores, passing rate) as well as qualitative measures (surveys, observations, etc). This is how most employees get paid for their merit. It isn't always fair, but seems to work out quite well the majority of the time. Of coarse you would have to get rid of the union first.

If the union wasn't present, base pay, benefits could be different for different schools. Perhaps inner city schools that may be more of a challenging environment would pay significantly more than outer ring superb schools (kind of like hazard pay). If the union wasn't present, teachers could also change schools much more easily if they weren't happy with their raises, classes, hours, etc...

Nothing novel about the idea. Just let the free market take over. Again, not perfect, but perhaps better than what exists today.

MZ- Ok, good. I was just trying to clear the air.

Let's start with the good. I really believe that if you incorporated more admin and parent surveys and observations into a merit pay systems, teachers' unions would be willing to sit at the table and discuss that as a component.

The quantitative portion is an entirely different story. If I teach 9th grade English, the kids don't take a state test at all. How am I paid? What if I teach HomeEc or Gym?

If I teach 10th grade, they do-- but if they score well, can you really prove it was because of me instead of their previous nine teachers?

When they take the test, are you giving me some sort of handicap for the students I have that have learning disabilities, an IEP and a Special Ed teacher who monitors their progress? How are they paid?

What if-- and this happens-- students simply fill in ABCDCBA on the test because they don't care? Or if they don't come at all the day of?

If we implement testing as a manner of competitive pay, doesn't it stand to reason that teachers would cease to do things like share lesson plans that work among their departments? Won't this encourage more cheating? It's sad, but it's going to happen in places. And it has.

As I'm outta room, one more point: what made your best teachers so? Was it your scores on those tests, or did they transcend and make you a better person and more critical thinker? We need to address these Qs and more to get a fair and accurate system.

Patrick, there are no perfect metrics. You can measure leading indicators and set goals like other salaried professions do. I wasn't implying test scores alone. I always had a mixture of qualitative and quantitative goals when I was employed.

Let's say you are an engineer in a mfg. company. You are assigned certain parts and processes that you are responsible for on the shop floor. You don't have control over who is assigned to manufacture your parts. You might get e best, or the worst. That doesn't absolve you of your responsibility to improve the process. In this case, perhaps you would measure the timeliness of dealing with defects, the cost of rework, improvement ideas, etc...

Again, there is no perfect metric but to simply say that nothing can be measured and taken with a grain of salt isn't wise. People need accountability.

Your a smart guy. Are you trying to say that quantitative measure cannot exist in teaching?

If all your students fill out random answers, I would ask why did that happen? If a person intentially scraps a part, I would wonder why as well. It could be the teacher or engineers fault, or it may have nothing to do with them. Either way, it shouldn't be ignored.

My best teachers challenged me, engaged my mind, and therefore I learned more, and yes got better test scores.

MZ- I guess I would argue-- and this may be idealistic of me-- that generally speaking our students are more important than a product that's produced. And I think that fundamentally speaking, teachers have a problem with reducing students to numbers, especially when the systems we use to measure them are filled with variables that are simply being ignored.

But, to address your metaphor: wouldn't it stand to reason that, if company A was making something with "defective" parts, and a job came open at company B where that was not a problem, that you would leave company A and work for B?

In my time as a teacher, I've worked in districts (as either a teacher or sub) in three different states, across all rural, urban and suburban designations. Each of those types of districts are dealing with student populations of varying backgrounds, but have problems unique to only their type of school. And, yes, I'm here to tell you-- and the comments on this blog are evidence of this-- rural and urban districts deal with parents and students who simply do not care about education. They see us as babysitters, and don't respect the institution. So, yes, there are plenty of kids who simply do not care. If I get that kid to change his mind, and take education seriously, how do you judge that on paper? Believe me, good teachers do not abdicate that responsibility. In Vegas, teachers literally have to go to the kids' houses to get them on test day.

(more)

Also, i would like to point out that (and this depends on your CBA, but I've never worked in a district that didn't do this) we are already evaluated in-person for our performance on several occasions. In my district, administrators do several walk-throughs and full, written observations during the course of a year. In those, teachers provide lesson plans with rationales and learning targets for what the kids are expected to be able to do each day. You cannot get tenure without renewal of your license, which includes the observation process, as well as getting certified by the state as a "Highly Qualified Teacher" and/or a Master's Degree and completion of a professional development program.

So, it's not like that aspect isn't already incorporated into our jobs, and we're just doing our thing without answering to anyone. And that process can be refined, but it should be done so at a local level, not a state or federal one, where the community can dictate their own standards for what makes a good teacher for their population.

So, again, I think teachers would be inclined to discuss a qualitative system, locally. Quantitatively, I'm not saying coming up with that system is IMPOSSIBLE, but our schools are worth a better effort than the ones I've seen presented in order to eliminate the variables I've outlined to make it a fair system. Otherwise you will drive teachers away, not bring them in.

Patrick, I would assume that if you had a convert (or several) that went from not caring about school to caring about education there would be several measureable indicators. I am pleased to hear that you have multiple qualitative reviews throughout the year, which is a good thing. I wonder what difference it makes since CBA likely doesn’t allow pay for performance. Certainly those teachers with a "calling" to the profession will do their best regardless, but what about the teachers that haven't been "called." I would have to assume that the union and the CBA protects them.

You had asked about my experience with “good” teachers that made an impact in my life. I replied. I also had many teachers who weren’t “good”, some that were terrible and clearly phoned it in. I couldn’t tell you the percentage, but in my experience it was closer to 50%-50% than 80%-20%. It appears to me that there are two challenges, rewarding and encouraging the “good” teachers, and dealing with the “bad” ones. Based on personal experience, I tend to look at what works in the private market as a model, all be it an imperfect one. Raises and promotions on one side, no raises, improvement plans, and terminations on the other.

Mr. Clemens, 5 yrs is very early in one's career. It sounds to me as if you are doing all the right things to get ahead and earn the respect that teachers that have gone before you, sadly, have lost. I hope my child always has teachers like you who automatically do their best, just as I do at my career. Sadly she is not in public school either as that is not where we find teachers like you.

Victor - My bet's that you'd run crying from the classroom after the first week if you tried to go in and deal with everything these teachers must. And based on your grammar & punctuation, you didn't respect teachers (or listen to them) when you had the chance. Take your Barbara Streisand and your turkey and go on home now.

Victor - if you'd paid attention to your teachers, you'd know enough to read other people's comments and you'd see up there where I told PaulRevere that I am not and have never been a teacher (nor have I ever been in a union). Sadly, it's people like you, who obviously refused to take advantage of the educational opportunities with which everyone in this country is blessed, who are sinking our system.

Maybe it's empathy, and an open respect for people whose pursuit of the American Dream need not match her own.

"Anyone with a brain knows that the system is sinking of it`s own weight...through 16 years of schooling, I never received a cut in grade for spelling or grammar."

Maybe you should have. The proper word for the first sentence, which you have misused several times, is "its."

"Since you have never belonged to a union and were never a teacher, why should we accept that you have any idea what you are talking about." I have intimate knowledge of the public educational system NOT from "16 years of schooling" (which appears to be YOUR only "qualification") but from research and first-hand experience as an adult. I have 4 immediate family members who are or were teachers, I have attended meetings and walked picket lines, and I regularly attend educational conferences where relevant issues of education are discussed and debated. I have an MBA from Case Western (so I understand the financial picture) and I'm a learning coach for 2 kids, so I have skin the game as it stands today. Remind me again of YOUR qualifications, beyond having once been a student?

"You continue to spew insults and bluster then prove your lack of understanding of the subject." Pot? Kettle.

"...it`s people like you who base their decisions and arguments on feelings or assumptions instead of facts who are the REAL problem." Well, again. With all the assumptions you consistently make, it seems you are your own problem.

"I know of what I speak, or I don`t speak." Except on Patch.

We WERE discussing the subject earlier, before you chimed in with bluster, insults, and condescension. If you have superior communication skills, use them instead of puffing up your chest and insulting people. I don't come here to "win" debates; I come to discuss with my neighbors my views on modern issues, with civility, whether or not our views agree. Perhaps I "came to a gun fight with a knife," but you, sir, have come to forum of civil discourse armed with a big ego and a big mouth full of insults.

Gary,
Are you volunteering?

Here's the part of the equation not yet discussed. Private school expects volunteers. In the classroom during the school day so teachers may meet and increase effectiveness.Throughout the school and with upkeep indoors and out anytime. Where ever a family member can spare an hour to keep things running well & avoid paying outside help. We are finger printed and background checked at our own expense.Families pick up the slack and answer the needs of the school when asked. There is no specific time obligation, but is all scheduled and very well organized. Sign up at the start of the year. Also,there is no policy preventing us from gifting money. The amount is anonymous, whatever you feel is good. In a class of 22, $10- $25ea a teacher gets a nice gift every year. Beats another apple, right? We show appreciation for the teachers often. Mutual respect is fostered in this environment. I'm not against private unions that collectively can buy their health and other benefits together. It's the public sector where every cook gets the benefits as a cop as do teachers who often treat parents like buffoons. Mutual respect will never come out of that. Private schools typically do better than public. But the union won't allow parent volunteers & then complain parents aren't engaged. They cut arts & sports & close schools to pay contracts but no parents can read with the class, make art, file books, paint walls.Teachers will earn our respect & support again when they stand up to the union

"Private schools typically do better than public," That's not borne out by factual, objective studies, Shelley. At least none that I've seen. Can you provide references for that supposition?

As for the statements, "But the union won't allow parent volunteers & then complain parents aren't engaged. They cut arts & sports & close schools to pay contracts but no parents can read with the class, make art, file books, paint walls. Also, there is no policy preventing us [in private schools] from gifting money." I have never heard of a union blocking parental volunteers, just administrators or in some cases, stale teachers on a power trip who don't want nosy parents threatening their superiority in the classroom. And no school I know of - public OR private - refuses monetary gifts. The "they" you refer to as cutting programs definitely isn't the union - it's SCHOOL BOARDS making those cuts. Again, I'm no fan of unions, but I also think teachers get blamed for problems that are not of teachers' making. Teachers are in a hard spot because they have no choice but to join unions in order to teach in most brick & mortar public schools.

Shelley,

I'm not touting my resume; I was answering Victor's questions. And I have no agenda. As I said above (really, does ANYONE read?!), I am for TEACHERS, *NOT* unions. By the way, teachers pay toward benefits, too, and their benefit pay-in HAS increased along with everyone else's. You do know that,right? Every teacher I know has taken a pay freeze or cuts and cost of living DECREASES over the last 6 years, along with everyone else. I don't disagree that unions are part of the problem - they help neither students NOR teachers. Of course, Patrick will respectfully disagree with me.

Schools need more funding because millage doesn't adjust (as I tried to explain to PaulRevere up there and as most people do NOT understand). Even if you remove unions and wages from the picture, the cost of educating students has risen dramatically. Utilities, gasoline, food - as you yourself pointed out, the cost of ALL of those has risen and schools require ALL OF THOSE to transport & educate students. And don't even get me started on the cost of tech and textbooks...

You talk about parents finding schools without union teachers. I know! I AM one of those parents! I have one child in a public online school - whose teachers are NOT union. My other daughter is in a public magnet school for the arts with unionized teachers. Frankly, I don't care whether a school is unionized or not. My kids need an education NOW and I have (and will) seek out the best environment for their learning.

Frankly, I have no problem with the PERS benefits. You've got to remember, for the most part, people who work in public service do so for FAR less than they could make in comparable jobs in industry. Over a decade ago, my husband (a district technology coordinator) was offered DOUBLE his school salary to go work for a bank doing the SAME THING he was/is doing for an Ohio school district. He stayed in education because he WANTS to be in education. Similarly, I know an engineer who serves us in ODOT who cold easily make double his salary going outside (engineering professionals are almost always in demand). Retirement benefits for public workers were set up to compensate them in some small way for those sacrifices. If public sector jobs were as profitable as some people on these comments seem to think they are, people would FLOCK to them. But when 50% of new teachers quit within the first 5 years due to low salaries or poor working conditions, there's obviously a problem. Now, am I in favor of public employee policies like double-dipping? Heck no! There are absolutely some reforms that could and should be made.

PERS comes from the paychecks of working people. Take a survey of average working people and ask them if they think that paying 100% of a retirement account for janitors & ward secretaries, etc is how they want their tax dollars spent. Re priv. vs pub schools: I can only go by the 4 private schools that I looked at for my child. All 4 had higher graduation rates, college entrance rates, and higher scores on those all important tests in math and science than Lakewood elementary. I only know what I have researched personally. My friends in Indianapolis, Phoenix, Jacksonville, Atlanta all found the same thing. $60 billion came from the working population when half don't make enough to pay federal taxes. So the people underemployed at gas stations and in retail stores trying to make ends meet should be paying for a luxury for every single public sector toilet cleaner? I don't think so.In fact, the Congressional Business Office proves you wrong also. In regards to your assertion that public sector jobs pay less. Only when you get past people with master's degrees, does the private sector catch up to public sector compensation. It's not even close.You are weak on facts, Deb! You've been faking people out all day here. And, yes, people do flock to get those jobs. It is easy to google the CBO. And show me a union that says its ok for a teacher to leave the room and a parent to fill in. Those warm n cuddly thugs! I'm done wasting my time with people who lie. I've got facts anytime.

http://www.buckeyeinstitute.org/pensions101
The Buckeye Institute page has many calculators. One is shows how retirement is figured for each state employee. There are around 340,000 of them to support forever with that 60 billion. It also compares your job in the private sector vs the same job as a gov't employee and it gives you what a high/low range of salary, benefits whether you are a clerk, attorney or teacher. Check your job on the calculator and while you're there see how much you pay in so they can retire at 30 yrs with a good salary and young enough to collect both the pension and a paycheck from a new career. Only in America, while others struggle and as this article started all of this teachers and schools could use that money. We so kindly reward every single government worker with a full free pension because, um, why???

Shelley,

There is no need to call me a liar, Shelley. The CBO data to which I assume you are referring (since you provided no link) shows that the lower your education, the better the public sector total compensation compares with private sector - this is true. But teachers cannot even receive certification without a Bachelor's degree and within a few years, they MUST obtain a Master's degree. So the longer a teacher is teaching, the greater the DECREASE in total compensation compared to private sector. This is antithetical to most people's perception of how wage progression should be for themselves. Can you honestly tell me that you expect to make a LESS competitive wage as you gain experience? That's what certified teachers can expect. Here are some links to back up what I am saying:

http://www.nirsonline.org/storage/nirs/documents/final_out_of_balance_report_april_2010.pdf

and

"Highly educated federal workers earn less than their peers in the private sector."
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/30/federal-pay-vs-private-sector-compensation/

As for comparing public versus private, I simply asked you to provide links to your assertion that private schools (in general) are better than public. I guess you don't have any.

I'm glad private school is working for your child and I'm not trying to dispute your clarification about your PERSONAL research in Lakewood, but your comments was more general than that. You can't compare with your friends in other states, because there's no standard across state lines. And if you were able to get test scores for the private schools you looked at in Lakewood (and verify that they were the same test given by the public schools), then kudos to you.

However, here are some links of articles to support my assertion that your blanket statement about private schools being better than public schools doesn't hold water:

"Apples and Oranges: Comparing Private and Public School Test Scores"
http://www.greatschools.org/find-a-school/defining-your-ideal/1173-comparing-private-public-school-test-scores.gs?page=all

"Do Test Scores Prove Private Schools Are Better"
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/answer-sheet/private-schools/do-test-scores-prove-private-s.html

"Public Schools vs. Private Schools: New Study Says There Is No Difference"
http://education-portal.com/articles/Public_Schools_vs_Private_Schools_New_Study_Says_There_is_No_Difference.html

*comments WERE more general

I hadn't seen that post when I made my comment. The Buckeye Institute is classified as libertarian leaning. http://politicsunspun.com/?page_id=79

Oh, and public school teachers haven't been retiring with just 30 years of work for over a decade. 35 years is the norm and with the law change this year, that number just went up again. My husband will not be eligible for full benefits until he has put in at least 38 years.

Debbie-
I'm not a teacher, not married to a teacher, so I may not know as much about a teachers retirement as you. That being said, isn't it true, though, that a teacher CAN retire NOW after 30 years, with no minimum age, and receive FULL benefits? And, that teachers, if they had waited until they had that magic 35 years, they received an enhanced benefit - where they can receive MORE than the regular 66% of their final average salary?
Also, when you say your husband won't be eligible for full benefits until he has put in 38 years (because of changes taking effect in 2015?), that will still be MANY years before ANY person in the private sector can receive full benefit - I'm assuming him to be 60 years old when he retires with full benefits and 77% of his average final salary as a pension.