Public school teachers will be losing jobs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They should hire more teachers to help students catch up on what they missed.

This is what our district is doing. Superintendent requested a 10% increase over last years budget to hire 32 more teachers (across 6 schools) to help with learning loss.

Which district?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would imagine this is based on contracting of budgets (the economy sucked last year, so less tax revenue), plus people pulling kids out of public schools means less funding.

No, state budgets are doing great, from all the stimulus money.

It has to do with the number of students, not state budgets. It means that private schools will be increasing their numbers of teachers -- but private schools don't pay as well as public.

Also non-unionized plus fewer benefits, I'd imagine.

Way fewer benefits, lower salary, less job security.

Treated as professionals. Freedom to develop own lesson plans. Coherent curriculums. Meaningful professional interactions. Well behaved kids (generally). Consequences for kids who don’t tuck their shirts in or who wear hats inside. Prevents things from escalating to attacks on teachers.

What a waste of time and effort! Does the untucked shirt make the kid stupider? Is everyone in the room distracted by a hat?

This is overpolicing without any academic benefit. Like the Japanese forcing naturally brown-haired students to dye their hair jet black.

[Anonymous]

My district is trying to add staff. I say trying because we can't find qualified people. It's almost May and a few years ago we'd be done hiring by mud May. Not this year

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My district is trying to add staff. I say trying because we can't find qualified people. It's almost May and a few years ago we'd be done hiring by mud May. Not this year

We haven't been fully staffed all year this year. I dread next year. I teach secondary math. My class sizes have been HUGE this year because we can't hire enough teachers. Every time some poster says "fire all the teachers" I just LOL because there aren't that many to fire anymore. And if you start firing the ones who are left then there will be no one left to teach the classes.

[Anonymous]

I have heard from two well-placed sources that based on projected enrollment figures in two different public school districts, schools are already planning for teacher lay offs for next school year.

I genuinely wonder if the teachers saw that one coming.

This comment suggests that teachers somehow made this year's decisions about virtual learning, which they DID NOT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I have heard from two well-placed sources that based on projected enrollment figures in two different public school districts, schools are already planning for teacher lay offs for next school year.

I genuinely wonder if the teachers saw that one coming.

This comment suggests that teachers somehow made this year's decisions about virtual learning, which they DID NOT.

The unions made it incredibly difficult for school districts to open and yes, the union kept schools virtual with vaccination demands and social media campaigns to parents.
You can be a member of the teachers union and claim you had nothing to do with the decisions. You did.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I have heard from two well-placed sources that based on projected enrollment figures in two different public school districts, schools are already planning for teacher lay offs for next school year.

I genuinely wonder if the teachers saw that one coming.

This comment suggests that teachers somehow made this year's decisions about virtual learning, which they DID NOT.

The unions made it incredibly difficult for school districts to open and yes, the union kept schools virtual with vaccination demands and social media campaigns to parents.
You can be a member of the teachers union and claim you had nothing to do with the decisions. You did.

Where are you that you can assume the PP is a member of a union?