Inside the great teacher resignation

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think that teachers, students, and parents would all be better off if discipline policies were changed to protect those in school buildings from the most disruptive students (who are a minority). Those truly disruptive, abusive, and unruly students take up too much time and emotional weight. Teachers should not have to suffer abuse at the hands of students, just as students should not lose out on their education due to serious disruptions by other students. Children need structure. By allowing this minority of students to have so much power, teachers are exhausted, and children learn that rules are optional. Parents, too, wind up in defense mode. Getting zeros for late or missing work seems excessive when other students can burst in and out of classrooms, throw items at teachers, and attack other kids at recess. Seriously. If you want discipline, then find a way to address the kids for whom conventional discipline strategies don't work.

What do you propose?

It's hard to imagine a path to implementing it, but I do think elementary rooms should have two teachers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that teachers, students, and parents would all be better off if discipline policies were changed to protect those in school buildings from the most disruptive students (who are a minority). Those truly disruptive, abusive, and unruly students take up too much time and emotional weight. Teachers should not have to suffer abuse at the hands of students, just as students should not lose out on their education due to serious disruptions by other students. Children need structure. By allowing this minority of students to have so much power, teachers are exhausted, and children learn that rules are optional. Parents, too, wind up in defense mode. Getting zeros for late or missing work seems excessive when other students can burst in and out of classrooms, throw items at teachers, and attack other kids at recess. Seriously. If you want discipline, then find a way to address the kids for whom conventional discipline strategies don't work.

I think people have the idea that the law says these disruptive students need to be in a normal school and not in a special school for kids with behavioral issues. I don’t know where they got that since I think the word appropriate implies that it needs to be appropriate for everyone and not just that problem student, but maybe this issue needs to go to the Supreme Court for an official ruling so that school districts all around the country can finally kick out these problem students and start to get learning back on track for everyone else.

I’ve taught students who cleared the room. Their parents typically have a lot of financial resources to fight to keep them where they are. I teach a girl who hospitalized a teacher in ES and permanently disfigured her own therapist. She is also highly gifted so she won a seat in our magnet. She is easily disregulated and there’s little warning she has been triggered. Fortunately, she attacks adults, not other children. However, this also makes it possible for her to stay in our school. Teachers are disposable. If we are hurt on the job, we’ll just be replaced by another warm body. But if a classmate was hurt, MCPS would be legally liable. As a result, she’s safe from transfer.

Different districts will mean different experiences, but in my experience in special education, it's more about districts saving money by keeping kids in cheaper placements; even parents who fight for their kids to be moved get denied. I see a lot more of those than I do gifted but disruptive kids who stay where they are because their parents demand it.

This. And in the limited cases where parents fight placement in ostensibly higher-support environments, it’s usually because the schools have done a horrible job implementing them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Byyeeee.

School is not childcare. We remember.

Sorry, I don’t care about that anymore.

Old news.

I want my kids taught by experience teachers. I don’t want to drive them away.

We all want our kids taught by skilled, reliable teachers. But then our teachers refused to come to work. They came back, but how long until their next temper tantrum?

Parents like you are why they aren't continuing to teach. They did work. Teaching virtually per the government's decision is working. You had the tantrum as you cannot handle your kids all day every day.

The data says otherwise. Virtual school was a tremendous failure, on multiple levels. Student performance dropped significantly. Kids with special needs lost their education services and supports. Millions suffered from losing access to safe and supportive educational environments.

I don’t know the answer, but maybe someone on DCUM does know the answer. For states like Florida and Texas where the schools remained open during 2020 and 2021, did the test scores also decline in those states?

The data is already in. States like Florida (which were never doing that poorly actually, even with really low spending, despite all the comments and assumptions on DCUM) moved up a lot. I think Florida is now number 3 in the country based on the most recent scores.

Well that’s not a true statement. According to Tampa Times snd the data, most Florida counties don’t issue the testing, so there’s no comparison. For the counties such as Hillsboro that issue testing, it would put Florida at 21snd 32 respectively among 50 states for eight grade math and reading. For fourth graders, you’re correct, Florida is now at number three. But is that just for the districts reporting. No idea where Florida would rank if all school districts administered and reported the results. https://www.tampabay.com/news/education/2022/10/24/national-assessment-of-educational-progress-florida-hillsborough-pinellas-pasco-addison-davis-kevin-hendrick-scores/?outputType=amp

Florida still had education loss during Covid even with open schools. However the loss was not as great as the schools that were virtual.
https://www.politico.com/amp/news/2022/06/08/desantis-in-person-learning-florida-students-schools-00038099

[Anonymous]

I don't know why people keep talking about the effect of COVID. This thread is about why teachers are resigning.

I'm an elementary school teacher. I know three teachers who resigned last year, a few years earlier than they had anticipated. Last year was an exceptionally hard year, it is true. We had so many teacher absences, and were constantly covering for teachers who were out and had no subs. This year it is even harder. We still have a lot of teacher vacancies; in addition we have a large number of brand new teachers, or conditional teachers without formal teacher training and student teaching. They can do OK for a while, but they really need mentors; yet the mentor teacher support isn't there because most of those teachers have been moved back into the classroom themselves.

Meanwhile, our school district is going like gangbusters with the next new big thing. They do NOT understand how tapped out we all are. More and more teachers are leaving or planning to leave.

The ONE thing that the school district could do, to retain experienced teachers, IMO is just to calm the eff down. Just let it be OK for us to be competent. Everything doesn't have to be bright and shiny and amazing. And beef up HR however you need to hire more teachers. Retrain administrators who are experiencing staff attrition. When `10% of your teaching staff resigns, that's a sign you have a poor administrator. Look at the principals who have managed to retain their experienced staff and ask "What is he doing, that other principals aren't doing?" And then train your administrators to do those things.

[Anonymous]

I think people have the idea that the law says these disruptive students need to be in a normal school and not in a special school for kids with behavioral issues. I don’t know where they got that since I think the word appropriate implies that it needs to be appropriate for everyone and not just that problem student, but maybe this issue needs to go to the Supreme Court for an official ruling so that school districts all around the country can finally kick out these problem students and start to get learning back on track for everyone else.

Yeah, appropriate in FAPE has a definition which is centered on what is appropriate for the student with the disability, not what is appropriate for the other, non disabled students.

"To be appropriate, education programs for students with disabilities must be designed to meet their individual needs to the same extent that the needs of nondisabled students are met. An appropriate education may include regular or special education and related aids and services to accommodate the unique needs of individuals with disabilities."

A non disabled student has a need for a safe, peaceful environment, free from yelling, screaming, kicking and other outbursts IMO but I don't think it is guaranteed by law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that teachers, students, and parents would all be better off if discipline policies were changed to protect those in school buildings from the most disruptive students (who are a minority). Those truly disruptive, abusive, and unruly students take up too much time and emotional weight. Teachers should not have to suffer abuse at the hands of students, just as students should not lose out on their education due to serious disruptions by other students. Children need structure. By allowing this minority of students to have so much power, teachers are exhausted, and children learn that rules are optional. Parents, too, wind up in defense mode. Getting zeros for late or missing work seems excessive when other students can burst in and out of classrooms, throw items at teachers, and attack other kids at recess. Seriously. If you want discipline, then find a way to address the kids for whom conventional discipline strategies don't work.

What do you propose?

It's hard to imagine a path to implementing it, but I do think elementary rooms should have two teachers.

Teacher here proposing a few things:
1) There needs to be a way to "fast track" kids like this into a special education self contained classroom within a few weeks, not within a few years. If, with interventions, the child can learn to self regulate, then said kid returns to gen ed, with a full time, 1:1 aide. If they are successful with that support, then fade the TA out.
2) Every single K-1st grade room needs a certified teacher and either a full time TA or a co-teacher. OR, limit K-1 rooms to no more than 10 kids.
3) Pass legislation that requires insurance companies to provide for the educational needs of kids who need to be outplaced. This is primarily a health issue and then second, an education issue. Insurance companies DO YOUR JOB. And the government needs to build, staff, train and supply schools to deal with kids like this.

[Anonymous]

But honestly, that is probably something that needs to happen -- parents need to get something written in federal law that states all students, including the non-disabled, have the right to an appropriate education, including one which is emotionally and physically safe for them, and then define a non-disruptive classroom learning environment as one in which loud outbursts of yelling and screaming, kicking and so on, do not regularly happen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I think people have the idea that the law says these disruptive students need to be in a normal school and not in a special school for kids with behavioral issues. I don’t know where they got that since I think the word appropriate implies that it needs to be appropriate for everyone and not just that problem student, but maybe this issue needs to go to the Supreme Court for an official ruling so that school districts all around the country can finally kick out these problem students and start to get learning back on track for everyone else.

Yeah, appropriate in FAPE has a definition which is centered on what is appropriate for the student with the disability, not what is appropriate for the other, non disabled students.

"To be appropriate, education programs for students with disabilities must be designed to meet their individual needs to the same extent that the needs of nondisabled students are met. An appropriate education may include regular or special education and related aids and services to accommodate the unique needs of individuals with disabilities."

A non disabled student has a need for a safe, peaceful environment, free from yelling, screaming, kicking and other outbursts IMO but I don't think it is guaranteed by law.

It’s also an issue for my kid with autism who doesn’t yell, kick, scream, etc but had middle school classmates who did these things regularly, depriving her of a safe learning environment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't know why people keep talking about the effect of COVID. This thread is about why teachers are resigning.

I'm an elementary school teacher. I know three teachers who resigned last year, a few years earlier than they had anticipated. Last year was an exceptionally hard year, it is true. We had so many teacher absences, and were constantly covering for teachers who were out and had no subs. This year it is even harder. We still have a lot of teacher vacancies; in addition we have a large number of brand new teachers, or conditional teachers without formal teacher training and student teaching. They can do OK for a while, but they really need mentors; yet the mentor teacher support isn't there because most of those teachers have been moved back into the classroom themselves.

Meanwhile, our school district is going like gangbusters with the next new big thing. They do NOT understand how tapped out we all are. More and more teachers are leaving or planning to leave.

The ONE thing that the school district could do, to retain experienced teachers, IMO is just to calm the eff down. Just let it be OK for us to be competent. Everything doesn't have to be bright and shiny and amazing. And beef up HR however you need to hire more teachers. Retrain administrators who are experiencing staff attrition. When `10% of your teaching staff resigns, that's a sign you have a poor administrator. Look at the principals who have managed to retain their experienced staff and ask "What is he doing, that other principals aren't doing?" And then train your administrators to do those things.

+1 yes yes yes

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that teachers, students, and parents would all be better off if discipline policies were changed to protect those in school buildings from the most disruptive students (who are a minority). Those truly disruptive, abusive, and unruly students take up too much time and emotional weight. Teachers should not have to suffer abuse at the hands of students, just as students should not lose out on their education due to serious disruptions by other students. Children need structure. By allowing this minority of students to have so much power, teachers are exhausted, and children learn that rules are optional. Parents, too, wind up in defense mode. Getting zeros for late or missing work seems excessive when other students can burst in and out of classrooms, throw items at teachers, and attack other kids at recess. Seriously. If you want discipline, then find a way to address the kids for whom conventional discipline strategies don't work.

What do you propose?

It's hard to imagine a path to implementing it, but I do think elementary rooms should have two teachers.

Teacher here proposing a few things:
1) There needs to be a way to "fast track" kids like this into a special education self contained classroom within a few weeks, not within a few years. If, with interventions, the child can learn to self regulate, then said kid returns to gen ed, with a full time, 1:1 aide. If they are successful with that support, then fade the TA out.
2) Every single K-1st grade room needs a certified teacher and either a full time TA or a co-teacher. OR, limit K-1 rooms to no more than 10 kids.
3) Pass legislation that requires insurance companies to provide for the educational needs of kids who need to be outplaced. This is primarily a health issue and then second, an education issue. Insurance companies DO YOUR JOB. And the government needs to build, staff, train and supply schools to deal with kids like this.

From your posts (at least, the posts I think come from you), you seem to be at breaking point. And as a parent of a child with special needs and behavioral challenges, I get how exhausting and painful (emotionally and physically) it can be. So I suspect your intentions are pure here. But I don't think you're really thinking through how this would play out for kids with special needs.

The reason we have IDEA to begin with is that states and local school districts were not providing appropriate educational services to kids with disabilities. And I get it-- it is expensive to do so. But essentially eliminating principle of Least Restrictive Environment would bring us right back to that. Kids would quickly get shuffled out to self-contained classrooms that would likely become even more short-staffed and resource poor. Once there, many kids would likely regress. Kids that might otherwise be successful in a gen ed classroom with an aid would never get that chance. Rather than giving kids the benefit of the doubt that they could be successful with supports, they'd instead have to prove themselves in an environment stacked against them. And much of the political pressure to provide resources for the needs of these students would disappear as quickly as the students would disappear into their segregated classrooms.

I don't think health insurance is the right funding path for a variety of reasons. For one, I hope we'll move to single-payer relatively soon anyway. But even more, it sets a bad precedent, would be complicated to regulate, and would likely pose serious challenges to low-income and/or underinsured families. We don't expect insurance companies to reimburse schools in order to make the environment accessible to kids with physical disabilities- why should developmental disabilities be different?

Developmental disabilities come in spectrums that are particularly hard to define and measure. I don't see how you could ever separate educational services that could be covered by the school from habilitative and support services covered by insurance. Any attempt to do so would likely result in battles between insurance companies and schools, where ultimately only the kids would lose. While there are some related challenges already in public schools related to this, at least public schools are arms of the government and ostensibly should have an interest in the public good. The same cannot be said for private insurance companies.

And this would likely get incredibly expensive, assuming these services would be billed like other habilitative services paid through insurance. Since my child was diagnosed with ASD as a toddler, we've simply accepted that we'd hit our out-of-pocket max every year, sometimes exceeding coverage limits and having to pay for things in full. It isn't easy financially, but we're able to do it. But while our income bracket may not be particularly high by DCUM standards, we're in a pretty high HHI percentile with good employer-subsidized health benefits. Not everyone is so lucky.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Anywhere in the South, Texas, and Southwest is basically terrible for teachers right now. Sadly many teachers even vote against their own interests in those areas due political reasons. Parents throw fits for various political reasons. Teachers are basically terrified, have no rights (non-union or weak union), and extremely poor salaries. Things are so jerrymandered that there is no hope that elections would change anything. When Oklahoma teachers strikes 4 years ago they got a pay raise but since then nothing and got cuts to benefits.
Kids are verbally, emotionally, professional and physically assaulting teachers left and right without consequence.

Go check the teachers Reddit page to see post after post of teacher pain.

Teachers need to put their own interests (salary, benefits, early retirement) first, before our kids or the best interests of the community.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that teachers, students, and parents would all be better off if discipline policies were changed to protect those in school buildings from the most disruptive students (who are a minority). Those truly disruptive, abusive, and unruly students take up too much time and emotional weight. Teachers should not have to suffer abuse at the hands of students, just as students should not lose out on their education due to serious disruptions by other students. Children need structure. By allowing this minority of students to have so much power, teachers are exhausted, and children learn that rules are optional. Parents, too, wind up in defense mode. Getting zeros for late or missing work seems excessive when other students can burst in and out of classrooms, throw items at teachers, and attack other kids at recess. Seriously. If you want discipline, then find a way to address the kids for whom conventional discipline strategies don't work.

What do you propose?

It's hard to imagine a path to implementing it, but I do think elementary rooms should have two teachers.

Teacher here proposing a few things:
1) There needs to be a way to "fast track" kids like this into a special education self contained classroom within a few weeks, not within a few years. If, with interventions, the child can learn to self regulate, then said kid returns to gen ed, with a full time, 1:1 aide. If they are successful with that support, then fade the TA out.
2) Every single K-1st grade room needs a certified teacher and either a full time TA or a co-teacher. OR, limit K-1 rooms to no more than 10 kids.
3) Pass legislation that requires insurance companies to provide for the educational needs of kids who need to be outplaced. This is primarily a health issue and then second, an education issue. Insurance companies DO YOUR JOB. And the government needs to build, staff, train and supply schools to deal with kids like this.

From your posts (at least, the posts I think come from you), you seem to be at breaking point. And as a parent of a child with special needs and behavioral challenges, I get how exhausting and painful (emotionally and physically) it can be. So I suspect your intentions are pure here. But I don't think you're really thinking through how this would play out for kids with special needs.

The reason we have IDEA to begin with is that states and local school districts were not providing appropriate educational services to kids with disabilities. And I get it-- it is expensive to do so. But essentially eliminating principle of Least Restrictive Environment would bring us right back to that. Kids would quickly get shuffled out to self-contained classrooms that would likely become even more short-staffed and resource poor. Once there, many kids would likely regress. Kids that might otherwise be successful in a gen ed classroom with an aid would never get that chance. Rather than giving kids the benefit of the doubt that they could be successful with supports, they'd instead have to prove themselves in an environment stacked against them. And much of the political pressure to provide resources for the needs of these students would disappear as quickly as the students would disappear into their segregated classrooms.

I don't think health insurance is the right funding path for a variety of reasons. For one, I hope we'll move to single-payer relatively soon anyway. But even more, it sets a bad precedent, would be complicated to regulate, and would likely pose serious challenges to low-income and/or underinsured families. We don't expect insurance companies to reimburse schools in order to make the environment accessible to kids with physical disabilities- why should developmental disabilities be different?

Developmental disabilities come in spectrums that are particularly hard to define and measure. I don't see how you could ever separate educational services that could be covered by the school from habilitative and support services covered by insurance. Any attempt to do so would likely result in battles between insurance companies and schools, where ultimately only the kids would lose. While there are some related challenges already in public schools related to this, at least public schools are arms of the government and ostensibly should have an interest in the public good. The same cannot be said for private insurance companies.

And this would likely get incredibly expensive, assuming these services would be billed like other habilitative services paid through insurance. Since my child was diagnosed with ASD as a toddler, we've simply accepted that we'd hit our out-of-pocket max every year, sometimes exceeding coverage limits and having to pay for things in full. It isn't easy financially, but we're able to do it. But while our income bracket may not be particularly high by DCUM standards, we're in a pretty high HHI percentile with good employer-subsidized health benefits. Not everyone is so lucky.

Every child -- those with special needs or not -- deserves the best we can give. Unfortunately, the number of students with special needs in public schools has increased substantially, along with parents who have very high expectations for services, correspondence updates, and paperwork; and they bring advocates and/or attorneys to meetings. I understand why that's being done, but the reality is that the typical school system across our country does not have the resources or personnel to provide that level of service. We are facing a crisis with too few teachers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Speaking of temper tantrums, how does being so angry and irate at teachers 2 years later help your child learn this year?

Is your vitriol helping children get help or is it making the situation worse?

Or are only teachers expected to put your child above their family/yourself?

Is that how you’d characterize the situation of the tens of millions of people that worked through the pandemic in public-facing and/or crowded conditions? Including the people that made sure you had food, utilities, medical services/supplies, public safety services, and countless other essential (and nonessential) goods and services?

No it is how I characterize this thread and people who are still rehashing this argument after 2 years.

There are different issues now. Are they related? Sure
If you want to help and not just spew anger then help. If not your anger is just anger and only you can change that.

Schools and teachers can help by acknowledging their past mistakes and promising to act differently in the future.

Ok we are so very very sorry. The pandemic was mishandled by school boards, the president who threw out the CDC pandemic playbook, superintendents and the NIH. Teachers taught these people and are therefore responsible for their actions. It is true, even teachers themselves made errors of judgement and wanted to work from home. In the next global emergency we will act differently. This new, improved and better plan will be based upon the needs of the pandemic of 2020, not whatever future situation the world will be facing.

Thank you for demonstrating my point. It’s a problem that teachers haven’t acknowledged the harm they did to kids through their actions. It’s not even clear many of them fully understand that harm or the role they played.

You are not getting apologies. You are not getting reparations. You are not getting future promises.

GROW UP AND MOVE ON. Or keep holding your breath and impotently stamping your feet like a toddler. Your choice.

Ok. Then watch public support for public schools and teachers continue to be in the gutter.

You are acting like this is a threat to teachers. Who are you honestly hurting but kids?

It is like in a divorce. If the parents are fighting over kids, custody or whatever in the end the KIDS are the ones who pay the price.

The only thing you are really doing is hurting kids. Especially those who already start with fewer advantages.

The teachers can and will find other work. The kids only get one shot at this and 2 years are already gone. You can take shots and get mad and kick and cry, or you can say “That sucked, but let’s get back to work. We have even more to do. How can I help?”

No, I was trying to say public schools are threatened. If you care about protecting public schools then you should be looking for a path that not only meets the needs of teachers, but also students and their families. Otherwise more and more of those families are going to turn to private schools, which we're already seeing happening. That will only increase political support for private school vouchers. And yes, it's going to be the disadvantaged kids that lose out, not really the DCUM crowd.

DCUM kids are generally in the top 5% of the nation economically. Most people who have left for private school already have. It's not just disadvantaged kids who will and are suffering, it's middle income and even upper middle income kids are too or at the very least, won't be able to afford even the cheapest of private schools.

Exactly. And those middle-income families rely on schools. That doesn't make them bad parents. The narrative that "school isn't child care" and that parents should have had backup plans for an 18-month school closure was a ridiculous attack on working families.

What? That is the weirdest take on this I have ever seen. Are you suggesting schools closed just to “attack” families? Attack means there was malicious intent. Wow. That is NUTS!

Read it again. The comments made by the teachers unions, and some teachers themselves, included attacks on working parents. There have been examples in this thread, although I tend to think they’re from SAHMs rather than teachers.

Ok clearly I have a comprehension fail. The PP said that the 18 month school closure was an attack on families. They in my mind were NOT talking about this thread. Saying the school closures were premeditated and an attack on families by teachers or unions is t crazy. Please reinterpret that post for me.

Read it again: "The narrative that "school isn't child care" and that parents should have had backup plans for an 18-month school closure was a ridiculous attack on working families."

The narrative used by teachers' unions and their supporters in their comments justifying the continued closures was the attack, not the closures themselves.

The "narrative" was not a narrative. For the 20-21 school year the CDC was still saying 6 feet of distance in public schools. I believe the FCPS superintendent went on CNN that spring to publicly say that the CDC needed to change the policy in order to let kids in school full time. Here is a quote from Feb 2021:

"Fairfax County Public Schools Superintendent Scott Brabrand says that is the most this large suburban Washington, DC, school district can do while still following US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines for safe school re-opening. The county is currently in the red zone."

https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/28/politics/fairfax-county-virginia-schools-reopen-covid/index.html

There physically wasn't enough space to social distance with all children attending school.

Now if you want to see that as an attack, go ahead.

The CDC guidelines that were the result of closed-door meetings with teachers unions? Yes, I remember those.

Link please? Funny that doctors offices did this too. In fact many still are AND are requiring masks.

Never mind I found it. In the New York post and Fox News and other conservative outlets.

Enjoy your vouchers and private schools!

Are you suggesting that you think the New York Post and Fox News fabricated the emails between the unions and the CDC leading up to the guidance?

Funny that you're suggesting that other news media didn't report on that. I'm pretty sure they did, but it does suggest some level of "filtering" either by the news media you read and/or by the news articles you choose to read.

Have a great day!

How interesting that you chose to comment on the media outlets that wrote the articles but not the substance of those articles.

Different poster here.

I don’t understand why this thread became an argument about Covid closures. We were facing a teacher shortage before Covid. I suspect if you ask teachers currently leaving the profession, most aren’t going to say Covid is the reason. They are leaving because of lack of respect, lack of autonomy, low pay for the hours required, etc.

I do think this argument highlights at least one reason teachers are leaving: being blamed for things out of their control. As much as some people would like to THINK the unions listen to teachers, that’s not actually the case. My former union regularly made decisions without consulting its members.

Exactly but I tired of people who treat teachers badly complaining about the shortage. If it’s an easy job then do it.

Who said it was an easy job?

Many posters have said they think easy with short working hours. When all the current teachers aged 50+ have retired, there will be a shortage of qualified, experienced teachers. Good luck finding replacements.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that teachers, students, and parents would all be better off if discipline policies were changed to protect those in school buildings from the most disruptive students (who are a minority). Those truly disruptive, abusive, and unruly students take up too much time and emotional weight. Teachers should not have to suffer abuse at the hands of students, just as students should not lose out on their education due to serious disruptions by other students. Children need structure. By allowing this minority of students to have so much power, teachers are exhausted, and children learn that rules are optional. Parents, too, wind up in defense mode. Getting zeros for late or missing work seems excessive when other students can burst in and out of classrooms, throw items at teachers, and attack other kids at recess. Seriously. If you want discipline, then find a way to address the kids for whom conventional discipline strategies don't work.

What do you propose?

It's hard to imagine a path to implementing it, but I do think elementary rooms should have two teachers.

Teacher here proposing a few things:
1) There needs to be a way to "fast track" kids like this into a special education self contained classroom within a few weeks, not within a few years. If, with interventions, the child can learn to self regulate, then said kid returns to gen ed, with a full time, 1:1 aide. If they are successful with that support, then fade the TA out.
2) Every single K-1st grade room needs a certified teacher and either a full time TA or a co-teacher. OR, limit K-1 rooms to no more than 10 kids.
3) Pass legislation that requires insurance companies to provide for the educational needs of kids who need to be outplaced. This is primarily a health issue and then second, an education issue. Insurance companies DO YOUR JOB. And the government needs to build, staff, train and supply schools to deal with kids like this.

From your posts (at least, the posts I think come from you), you seem to be at breaking point. And as a parent of a child with special needs and behavioral challenges, I get how exhausting and painful (emotionally and physically) it can be. So I suspect your intentions are pure here. But I don't think you're really thinking through how this would play out for kids with special needs.

The reason we have IDEA to begin with is that states and local school districts were not providing appropriate educational services to kids with disabilities. And I get it-- it is expensive to do so. But essentially eliminating principle of Least Restrictive Environment would bring us right back to that. Kids would quickly get shuffled out to self-contained classrooms that would likely become even more short-staffed and resource poor. Once there, many kids would likely regress. Kids that might otherwise be successful in a gen ed classroom with an aid would never get that chance. Rather than giving kids the benefit of the doubt that they could be successful with supports, they'd instead have to prove themselves in an environment stacked against them. And much of the political pressure to provide resources for the needs of these students would disappear as quickly as the students would disappear into their segregated classrooms.

I don't think health insurance is the right funding path for a variety of reasons. For one, I hope we'll move to single-payer relatively soon anyway. But even more, it sets a bad precedent, would be complicated to regulate, and would likely pose serious challenges to low-income and/or underinsured families. We don't expect insurance companies to reimburse schools in order to make the environment accessible to kids with physical disabilities- why should developmental disabilities be different?

Developmental disabilities come in spectrums that are particularly hard to define and measure. I don't see how you could ever separate educational services that could be covered by the school from habilitative and support services covered by insurance. Any attempt to do so would likely result in battles between insurance companies and schools, where ultimately only the kids would lose. While there are some related challenges already in public schools related to this, at least public schools are arms of the government and ostensibly should have an interest in the public good. The same cannot be said for private insurance companies.

And this would likely get incredibly expensive, assuming these services would be billed like other habilitative services paid through insurance. Since my child was diagnosed with ASD as a toddler, we've simply accepted that we'd hit our out-of-pocket max every year, sometimes exceeding coverage limits and having to pay for things in full. It isn't easy financially, but we're able to do it. But while our income bracket may not be particularly high by DCUM standards, we're in a pretty high HHI percentile with good employer-subsidized health benefits. Not everyone is so lucky.

Every child -- those with special needs or not -- deserves the best we can give. Unfortunately, the number of students with special needs in public schools has increased substantially, along with parents who have very high expectations for services, correspondence updates, and paperwork; and they bring advocates and/or attorneys to meetings. I understand why that's being done, but the reality is that the typical school system across our country does not have the resources or personnel to provide that level of service. We are facing a crisis with too few teachers.

So, we should sacrifice the students with special needs for the benefit of the other students? I think you're starting from a place of good intentions, but there's a fine line between being burnt out and simply not caring.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that teachers, students, and parents would all be better off if discipline policies were changed to protect those in school buildings from the most disruptive students (who are a minority). Those truly disruptive, abusive, and unruly students take up too much time and emotional weight. Teachers should not have to suffer abuse at the hands of students, just as students should not lose out on their education due to serious disruptions by other students. Children need structure. By allowing this minority of students to have so much power, teachers are exhausted, and children learn that rules are optional. Parents, too, wind up in defense mode. Getting zeros for late or missing work seems excessive when other students can burst in and out of classrooms, throw items at teachers, and attack other kids at recess. Seriously. If you want discipline, then find a way to address the kids for whom conventional discipline strategies don't work.

What do you propose?

It's hard to imagine a path to implementing it, but I do think elementary rooms should have two teachers.

Teacher here proposing a few things:
1) There needs to be a way to "fast track" kids like this into a special education self contained classroom within a few weeks, not within a few years. If, with interventions, the child can learn to self regulate, then said kid returns to gen ed, with a full time, 1:1 aide. If they are successful with that support, then fade the TA out.
2) Every single K-1st grade room needs a certified teacher and either a full time TA or a co-teacher. OR, limit K-1 rooms to no more than 10 kids.
3) Pass legislation that requires insurance companies to provide for the educational needs of kids who need to be outplaced. This is primarily a health issue and then second, an education issue. Insurance companies DO YOUR JOB. And the government needs to build, staff, train and supply schools to deal with kids like this.

From your posts (at least, the posts I think come from you), you seem to be at breaking point. And as a parent of a child with special needs and behavioral challenges, I get how exhausting and painful (emotionally and physically) it can be. So I suspect your intentions are pure here. But I don't think you're really thinking through how this would play out for kids with special needs.

The reason we have IDEA to begin with is that states and local school districts were not providing appropriate educational services to kids with disabilities. And I get it-- it is expensive to do so. But essentially eliminating principle of Least Restrictive Environment would bring us right back to that. Kids would quickly get shuffled out to self-contained classrooms that would likely become even more short-staffed and resource poor. Once there, many kids would likely regress. Kids that might otherwise be successful in a gen ed classroom with an aid would never get that chance. Rather than giving kids the benefit of the doubt that they could be successful with supports, they'd instead have to prove themselves in an environment stacked against them. And much of the political pressure to provide resources for the needs of these students would disappear as quickly as the students would disappear into their segregated classrooms.

I don't think health insurance is the right funding path for a variety of reasons. For one, I hope we'll move to single-payer relatively soon anyway. But even more, it sets a bad precedent, would be complicated to regulate, and would likely pose serious challenges to low-income and/or underinsured families. We don't expect insurance companies to reimburse schools in order to make the environment accessible to kids with physical disabilities- why should developmental disabilities be different?

Developmental disabilities come in spectrums that are particularly hard to define and measure. I don't see how you could ever separate educational services that could be covered by the school from habilitative and support services covered by insurance. Any attempt to do so would likely result in battles between insurance companies and schools, where ultimately only the kids would lose. While there are some related challenges already in public schools related to this, at least public schools are arms of the government and ostensibly should have an interest in the public good. The same cannot be said for private insurance companies.

And this would likely get incredibly expensive, assuming these services would be billed like other habilitative services paid through insurance. Since my child was diagnosed with ASD as a toddler, we've simply accepted that we'd hit our out-of-pocket max every year, sometimes exceeding coverage limits and having to pay for things in full. It isn't easy financially, but we're able to do it. But while our income bracket may not be particularly high by DCUM standards, we're in a pretty high HHI percentile with good employer-subsidized health benefits. Not everyone is so lucky.

Every child -- those with special needs or not -- deserves the best we can give. Unfortunately, the number of students with special needs in public schools has increased substantially, along with parents who have very high expectations for services, correspondence updates, and paperwork; and they bring advocates and/or attorneys to meetings. I understand why that's being done, but the reality is that the typical school system across our country does not have the resources or personnel to provide that level of service. We are facing a crisis with too few teachers.

So, we should sacrifice the students with special needs for the benefit of the other students? I think you're starting from a place of good intentions, but there's a fine line between being burnt out and simply not caring.

Should we continue to sacrifice the other students for the benefit of the student with special needs?