Incentives to Keep Teachers

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are already plenty of incentives. The problem is the grass is always greener, but at least there's no shortage of new teachers to fill in for the unhappy ones who leave.

Exactly. They get really good benefits and there are housing programs already. And after the first few years the pay is decent to good for a ten month employee and they get tuition benefits for a masters or PhD.

And yet we can’t keep teachers in the classroom. Here we are commenting on a thread about how to incentivize people to stay in the profession.

TEACHERS know that the benefits aren’t worth the agony, but DCUM is here to tell teachers that their jobs are amazing. We’ll keep pretending that the teacher shortage isn’t a thing.

I am an MCPS employee. I know the benefits are great and my pay is not bad. I am a few years away from retiring with my full pension and I am leaving at the end of the school year. The stress and constant changes and demands are no longer worth it. I handed in my retirement papers and feel like the weight of the world has been lifted from my shoulders.

Most jobs have constant changes and demands. The only difference is you don’t have to be worried about being terminated for no good reason.

People who haven’t taught should stop commenting on the job because you don’t know it. Sure, other jobs have changes (challenges, you mean?) and demands. Some of them are even hard jobs. But they aren’t teaching, which comes with a unique set of challenges.

I’ve worked other jobs AND I’ve taught.

You think social workers, police, fire fighters, EMT's have it easy? Why don't you try being child welfare investigator for a week?

All those jobs come with overtime. Teachers are stuck either grading/planning on their own time or being castigated/reprimanded for not getting it done on time.

Social workers don't get overtime.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you live in MCPS you want

A. Child with significant needs that an IEP and self contained class is blatantly obvious and the only solution

B. Child that has an IQ so far above their peers that there is no cohort and magnet placement occurs beginning in elem

C. To have an HHI that you can afford private

I have a child in my A category. My other child is an average student. Not DCUM average, truly a B/1100 SAT student. I’m lucky that I have the money for my option C category.

So, why are you posting here if your kids aren't in MCPS?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, I'm a "let the whole system burn" teacher. I don't care what happens to it anymore. Truly. 3 years and I'm done. I truly believe there's going to be a whole meltdown, there'll be entire schools that have to close and or class sizes in the 40's or 50's, and eventually special ed will have to be taken over through private insurance. But again, I don't care anymore. This system has chewed me up and spit me out. Let it burn.

There's a small group of posters that get hard at the thought of getting children with special needs out of public schools so that they and their kids won't have to see them anymore.

Keep it in your pants. It isn't going to happen.

I don’t think this was what the PP was saying, but that said, I do think that such a proposal would pass at this point if it was put to a public vote. Classrooms are just far too disruptive now for any learning to take place, and the majority of people are sick of it. The laws should be changed to only allow kids to stay in mainstream classrooms, special ed diagnoses or not, if they do not interfere with the learning of other students.

Sounds good to me.

That's the current law, with the caveat that the school needs to try services and supports for the student that could make the mainstream classroom effective and appropriate.

The law isn't the issue here. The issue is that schools don't want to provide services/supports nor do they want to move students to more restrictive placements because both are expensive.

The law is absolutely the issue. It's the entire issue, in fact. It's a pie-in-the-sky, aspirational list of demands that has never come with even 1/3 of the federal funding necessary to support it. It was badly funded at the time it passed! And now the number of students it's supposed to cover has quadrupled. It's unworkable. It creates a bottomless pit of entitlements with no funding. On what planet does that make sense? The result has been a decades-long shell game where parents rightfully point to a law that says their child has the right to unlimited supports in whatever they need, at someone else's expense, and the school district faces the reality on the ground and in the gap between the two, filling out endless paperwork, are the dwindling staff. IDEA needs to be radically overhauled and some kind of actual legal limits placed on paperwork and meetings and lawsuits so at least the state of affairs is honest for everyone. Literally no other country does it like we do, and there's a reason why. IDEA is completely disintegrating under the weight of its own contradictions.

Why would students with special needs be funded through federal tax dollars instead of state/local tax dollars like other students?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you live in MCPS you want

A. Child with significant needs that an IEP and self contained class is blatantly obvious and the only solution

B. Child that has an IQ so far above their peers that there is no cohort and magnet placement occurs beginning in elem

C. To have an HHI that you can afford private

I have a child in my A category. My other child is an average student. Not DCUM average, truly a B/1100 SAT student. I’m lucky that I have the money for my option C category.

So, why are you posting here if your kids aren't in MCPS?

My SN child is in MCPS. I’m fortunate or unfortunate depending on how you look at it that his are significant enough to get him into a self contained classroom. The support is amazing. Truthfully every student in MCPS should be able to access this type of help/support.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are already plenty of incentives. The problem is the grass is always greener, but at least there's no shortage of new teachers to fill in for the unhappy ones who leave.

Exactly. They get really good benefits and there are housing programs already. And after the first few years the pay is decent to good for a ten month employee and they get tuition benefits for a masters or PhD.

And yet we can’t keep teachers in the classroom. Here we are commenting on a thread about how to incentivize people to stay in the profession.

TEACHERS know that the benefits aren’t worth the agony, but DCUM is here to tell teachers that their jobs are amazing. We’ll keep pretending that the teacher shortage isn’t a thing.

I am an MCPS employee. I know the benefits are great and my pay is not bad. I am a few years away from retiring with my full pension and I am leaving at the end of the school year. The stress and constant changes and demands are no longer worth it. I handed in my retirement papers and feel like the weight of the world has been lifted from my shoulders.

Most jobs have constant changes and demands. The only difference is you don’t have to be worried about being terminated for no good reason.

People who haven’t taught should stop commenting on the job because you don’t know it. Sure, other jobs have changes (challenges, you mean?) and demands. Some of them are even hard jobs. But they aren’t teaching, which comes with a unique set of challenges.

I’ve worked other jobs AND I’ve taught.

You think social workers, police, fire fighters, EMT's have it easy? Why don't you try being child welfare investigator for a week?

All those jobs come with overtime. Teachers are stuck either grading/planning on their own time or being castigated/reprimanded for not getting it done on time.

Social workers don't get overtime.

Go start a thread about incentives to retain social workers, police, fire, EMTs, etc. It’s not a competition people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are already plenty of incentives. The problem is the grass is always greener, but at least there's no shortage of new teachers to fill in for the unhappy ones who leave.

Exactly. They get really good benefits and there are housing programs already. And after the first few years the pay is decent to good for a ten month employee and they get tuition benefits for a masters or PhD.

And yet we can’t keep teachers in the classroom. Here we are commenting on a thread about how to incentivize people to stay in the profession.

TEACHERS know that the benefits aren’t worth the agony, but DCUM is here to tell teachers that their jobs are amazing. We’ll keep pretending that the teacher shortage isn’t a thing.

I am an MCPS employee. I know the benefits are great and my pay is not bad. I am a few years away from retiring with my full pension and I am leaving at the end of the school year. The stress and constant changes and demands are no longer worth it. I handed in my retirement papers and feel like the weight of the world has been lifted from my shoulders.

Most jobs have constant changes and demands. The only difference is you don’t have to be worried about being terminated for no good reason.

People who haven’t taught should stop commenting on the job because you don’t know it. Sure, other jobs have changes (challenges, you mean?) and demands. Some of them are even hard jobs. But they aren’t teaching, which comes with a unique set of challenges.

I’ve worked other jobs AND I’ve taught.

You think social workers, police, fire fighters, EMT's have it easy? Why don't you try being child welfare investigator for a week?

All those jobs come with overtime. Teachers are stuck either grading/planning on their own time or being castigated/reprimanded for not getting it done on time.

Social workers don't get overtime.

Go start a thread about incentives to retain social workers, police, fire, EMTs, etc. It’s not a competition people.

Why? Anyone good, the county runs out. Years ago they used to be great jobs that were had to get. Now they have lots of unfilled positions. The pay vs hours and how you are treated are not worth it once you have kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, I'm a "let the whole system burn" teacher. I don't care what happens to it anymore. Truly. 3 years and I'm done. I truly believe there's going to be a whole meltdown, there'll be entire schools that have to close and or class sizes in the 40's or 50's, and eventually special ed will have to be taken over through private insurance. But again, I don't care anymore. This system has chewed me up and spit me out. Let it burn.

There's a small group of posters that get hard at the thought of getting children with special needs out of public schools so that they and their kids won't have to see them anymore.

Keep it in your pants. It isn't going to happen.

I don’t think this was what the PP was saying, but that said, I do think that such a proposal would pass at this point if it was put to a public vote. Classrooms are just far too disruptive now for any learning to take place, and the majority of people are sick of it. The laws should be changed to only allow kids to stay in mainstream classrooms, special ed diagnoses or not, if they do not interfere with the learning of other students.

Sounds good to me.

That's the current law, with the caveat that the school needs to try services and supports for the student that could make the mainstream classroom effective and appropriate.

The law isn't the issue here. The issue is that schools don't want to provide services/supports nor do they want to move students to more restrictive placements because both are expensive.

The law is absolutely the issue. It's the entire issue, in fact. It's a pie-in-the-sky, aspirational list of demands that has never come with even 1/3 of the federal funding necessary to support it. It was badly funded at the time it passed! And now the number of students it's supposed to cover has quadrupled. It's unworkable. It creates a bottomless pit of entitlements with no funding. On what planet does that make sense? The result has been a decades-long shell game where parents rightfully point to a law that says their child has the right to unlimited supports in whatever they need, at someone else's expense, and the school district faces the reality on the ground and in the gap between the two, filling out endless paperwork, are the dwindling staff. IDEA needs to be radically overhauled and some kind of actual legal limits placed on paperwork and meetings and lawsuits so at least the state of affairs is honest for everyone. Literally no other country does it like we do, and there's a reason why. IDEA is completely disintegrating under the weight of its own contradictions.

Why would students with special needs be funded through federal tax dollars instead of state/local tax dollars like other students?

Because it's a federal mandate and forcing states to provide all these supports and services via grand idealistic proclamation and then providing totally inadequate funding to do so is BS. If the states have to fund it then IDEA needs to be made a lot more vague with a lot less requirements and promises so states can actually tailor it to what they can manage. Right now it's like if the feds forced state Medicaid expansion to wider income brackets but gave zero CMS funding to do so and then sued the states when they couldn't get blood out of a stone. It's absurd on its face and it's all falling to pieces.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, I'm a "let the whole system burn" teacher. I don't care what happens to it anymore. Truly. 3 years and I'm done. I truly believe there's going to be a whole meltdown, there'll be entire schools that have to close and or class sizes in the 40's or 50's, and eventually special ed will have to be taken over through private insurance. But again, I don't care anymore. This system has chewed me up and spit me out. Let it burn.

There's a small group of posters that get hard at the thought of getting children with special needs out of public schools so that they and their kids won't have to see them anymore.

Keep it in your pants. It isn't going to happen.

I don’t think this was what the PP was saying, but that said, I do think that such a proposal would pass at this point if it was put to a public vote. Classrooms are just far too disruptive now for any learning to take place, and the majority of people are sick of it. The laws should be changed to only allow kids to stay in mainstream classrooms, special ed diagnoses or not, if they do not interfere with the learning of other students.

Sounds good to me.

That's the current law, with the caveat that the school needs to try services and supports for the student that could make the mainstream classroom effective and appropriate.

The law isn't the issue here. The issue is that schools don't want to provide services/supports nor do they want to move students to more restrictive placements because both are expensive.

The law is absolutely the issue. It's the entire issue, in fact. It's a pie-in-the-sky, aspirational list of demands that has never come with even 1/3 of the federal funding necessary to support it. It was badly funded at the time it passed! And now the number of students it's supposed to cover has quadrupled. It's unworkable. It creates a bottomless pit of entitlements with no funding. On what planet does that make sense? The result has been a decades-long shell game where parents rightfully point to a law that says their child has the right to unlimited supports in whatever they need, at someone else's expense, and the school district faces the reality on the ground and in the gap between the two, filling out endless paperwork, are the dwindling staff. IDEA needs to be radically overhauled and some kind of actual legal limits placed on paperwork and meetings and lawsuits so at least the state of affairs is honest for everyone. Literally no other country does it like we do, and there's a reason why. IDEA is completely disintegrating under the weight of its own contradictions.

Why would students with special needs be funded through federal tax dollars instead of state/local tax dollars like other students?

Because it's a federal mandate and forcing states to provide all these supports and services via grand idealistic proclamation and then providing totally inadequate funding to do so is BS. If the states have to fund it then IDEA needs to be made a lot more vague with a lot less requirements and promises so states can actually tailor it to what they can manage. Right now it's like if the feds forced state Medicaid expansion to wider income brackets but gave zero CMS funding to do so and then sued the states when they couldn't get blood out of a stone. It's absurd on its face and it's all falling to pieces.

+1000. So well said!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, I'm a "let the whole system burn" teacher. I don't care what happens to it anymore. Truly. 3 years and I'm done. I truly believe there's going to be a whole meltdown, there'll be entire schools that have to close and or class sizes in the 40's or 50's, and eventually special ed will have to be taken over through private insurance. But again, I don't care anymore. This system has chewed me up and spit me out. Let it burn.

There's a small group of posters that get hard at the thought of getting children with special needs out of public schools so that they and their kids won't have to see them anymore.

Keep it in your pants. It isn't going to happen.

I don’t think this was what the PP was saying, but that said, I do think that such a proposal would pass at this point if it was put to a public vote. Classrooms are just far too disruptive now for any learning to take place, and the majority of people are sick of it. The laws should be changed to only allow kids to stay in mainstream classrooms, special ed diagnoses or not, if they do not interfere with the learning of other students.

Sounds good to me.

That's the current law, with the caveat that the school needs to try services and supports for the student that could make the mainstream classroom effective and appropriate.

The law isn't the issue here. The issue is that schools don't want to provide services/supports nor do they want to move students to more restrictive placements because both are expensive.

The law is absolutely the issue. It's the entire issue, in fact. It's a pie-in-the-sky, aspirational list of demands that has never come with even 1/3 of the federal funding necessary to support it. It was badly funded at the time it passed! And now the number of students it's supposed to cover has quadrupled. It's unworkable. It creates a bottomless pit of entitlements with no funding. On what planet does that make sense? The result has been a decades-long shell game where parents rightfully point to a law that says their child has the right to unlimited supports in whatever they need, at someone else's expense, and the school district faces the reality on the ground and in the gap between the two, filling out endless paperwork, are the dwindling staff. IDEA needs to be radically overhauled and some kind of actual legal limits placed on paperwork and meetings and lawsuits so at least the state of affairs is honest for everyone. Literally no other country does it like we do, and there's a reason why. IDEA is completely disintegrating under the weight of its own contradictions.

Why would students with special needs be funded through federal tax dollars instead of state/local tax dollars like other students?

Because it's a federal mandate and forcing states to provide all these supports and services via grand idealistic proclamation and then providing totally inadequate funding to do so is BS. If the states have to fund it then IDEA needs to be made a lot more vague with a lot less requirements and promises so states can actually tailor it to what they can manage. Right now it's like if the feds forced state Medicaid expansion to wider income brackets but gave zero CMS funding to do so and then sued the states when they couldn't get blood out of a stone. It's absurd on its face and it's all falling to pieces.

So, you don't think public schools should have to provide every student with free, appropriate education? If they did as you said and allowed states to "tailor" IDEA, what are you saying they should get rid of?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, I'm a "let the whole system burn" teacher. I don't care what happens to it anymore. Truly. 3 years and I'm done. I truly believe there's going to be a whole meltdown, there'll be entire schools that have to close and or class sizes in the 40's or 50's, and eventually special ed will have to be taken over through private insurance. But again, I don't care anymore. This system has chewed me up and spit me out. Let it burn.

There's a small group of posters that get hard at the thought of getting children with special needs out of public schools so that they and their kids won't have to see them anymore.

Keep it in your pants. It isn't going to happen.

I don’t think this was what the PP was saying, but that said, I do think that such a proposal would pass at this point if it was put to a public vote. Classrooms are just far too disruptive now for any learning to take place, and the majority of people are sick of it. The laws should be changed to only allow kids to stay in mainstream classrooms, special ed diagnoses or not, if they do not interfere with the learning of other students.

Sounds good to me.

That's the current law, with the caveat that the school needs to try services and supports for the student that could make the mainstream classroom effective and appropriate.

The law isn't the issue here. The issue is that schools don't want to provide services/supports nor do they want to move students to more restrictive placements because both are expensive.

The law is absolutely the issue. It's the entire issue, in fact. It's a pie-in-the-sky, aspirational list of demands that has never come with even 1/3 of the federal funding necessary to support it. It was badly funded at the time it passed! And now the number of students it's supposed to cover has quadrupled. It's unworkable. It creates a bottomless pit of entitlements with no funding. On what planet does that make sense? The result has been a decades-long shell game where parents rightfully point to a law that says their child has the right to unlimited supports in whatever they need, at someone else's expense, and the school district faces the reality on the ground and in the gap between the two, filling out endless paperwork, are the dwindling staff. IDEA needs to be radically overhauled and some kind of actual legal limits placed on paperwork and meetings and lawsuits so at least the state of affairs is honest for everyone. Literally no other country does it like we do, and there's a reason why. IDEA is completely disintegrating under the weight of its own contradictions.

Why would students with special needs be funded through federal tax dollars instead of state/local tax dollars like other students?

Because it's a federal mandate and forcing states to provide all these supports and services via grand idealistic proclamation and then providing totally inadequate funding to do so is BS. If the states have to fund it then IDEA needs to be made a lot more vague with a lot less requirements and promises so states can actually tailor it to what they can manage. Right now it's like if the feds forced state Medicaid expansion to wider income brackets but gave zero CMS funding to do so and then sued the states when they couldn't get blood out of a stone. It's absurd on its face and it's all falling to pieces.

So, you don't think public schools should have to provide every student with free, appropriate education? If they did as you said and allowed states to "tailor" IDEA, what are you saying they should get rid of?

Not PP—FAPE should be the standard. The problem is that it’s a federal mandate that state and local governments cannot afford. If the federal govt want to provide FAPE (and I think they should), they also need to provide the funding to support it. Without the funding state and local govts can only provide what their budget allows.

Why can’t MCPS hire more paras? Why can’t they create smaller classes? Why can’t they hire more school psychologists? Why can’t they hire more personnel that can attend IEP meetings? It all comes down to money.

It seems to me that the federal govt has the ability to print money or borrow from other governments when it wants do. State and local governments don’t have that ability. They can’t just magically make more money to spend like the federal govt.

FAPE is a wonderful law. It’s implementation and execution sucks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, I'm a "let the whole system burn" teacher. I don't care what happens to it anymore. Truly. 3 years and I'm done. I truly believe there's going to be a whole meltdown, there'll be entire schools that have to close and or class sizes in the 40's or 50's, and eventually special ed will have to be taken over through private insurance. But again, I don't care anymore. This system has chewed me up and spit me out. Let it burn.

There's a small group of posters that get hard at the thought of getting children with special needs out of public schools so that they and their kids won't have to see them anymore.

Keep it in your pants. It isn't going to happen.

I don’t think this was what the PP was saying, but that said, I do think that such a proposal would pass at this point if it was put to a public vote. Classrooms are just far too disruptive now for any learning to take place, and the majority of people are sick of it. The laws should be changed to only allow kids to stay in mainstream classrooms, special ed diagnoses or not, if they do not interfere with the learning of other students.

Sounds good to me.

That's the current law, with the caveat that the school needs to try services and supports for the student that could make the mainstream classroom effective and appropriate.

The law isn't the issue here. The issue is that schools don't want to provide services/supports nor do they want to move students to more restrictive placements because both are expensive.

The law is absolutely the issue. It's the entire issue, in fact. It's a pie-in-the-sky, aspirational list of demands that has never come with even 1/3 of the federal funding necessary to support it. It was badly funded at the time it passed! And now the number of students it's supposed to cover has quadrupled. It's unworkable. It creates a bottomless pit of entitlements with no funding. On what planet does that make sense? The result has been a decades-long shell game where parents rightfully point to a law that says their child has the right to unlimited supports in whatever they need, at someone else's expense, and the school district faces the reality on the ground and in the gap between the two, filling out endless paperwork, are the dwindling staff. IDEA needs to be radically overhauled and some kind of actual legal limits placed on paperwork and meetings and lawsuits so at least the state of affairs is honest for everyone. Literally no other country does it like we do, and there's a reason why. IDEA is completely disintegrating under the weight of its own contradictions.

Why would students with special needs be funded through federal tax dollars instead of state/local tax dollars like other students?

Because it's a federal mandate and forcing states to provide all these supports and services via grand idealistic proclamation and then providing totally inadequate funding to do so is BS. If the states have to fund it then IDEA needs to be made a lot more vague with a lot less requirements and promises so states can actually tailor it to what they can manage. Right now it's like if the feds forced state Medicaid expansion to wider income brackets but gave zero CMS funding to do so and then sued the states when they couldn't get blood out of a stone. It's absurd on its face and it's all falling to pieces.

When IDEA was originally passed in 1975, New Mexico refused to participate in IDEA and said they did not want any federal money that they would figure out how to provide their own services to students. Their reasoning was:

Over the years, one of the major deterrents to participation in the federal program has been the large proportion of small and rural school districts that have been unwilling to take on the required paperwork while receiving only a fraction of the costs in special education, state officials say.
Local school officials also have argued that the federal program would exacerbate the problem of finding qualified special-education teachers and other necessary professional support staff

It wasn't until almost ten years later in 1984 that New Mexico agreed to participate in IDEA.

The number of special education students is rising significantly. In many states it is now at or over 20% of students in special education. I just don't see how that is sustainable. New York (20.5% of its overall public school enrollment). Pennsylvania (20.2%), Maine (20.1%) and Massachusetts (19.3%). There is SO MUCH paperwork and so many meetings that need to be held for every special education student that teachers have little time to teach. It can be so stressful when there are contentious parents combined with districts who won't give students what they need so teachers are caught in the middle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are already plenty of incentives. The problem is the grass is always greener, but at least there's no shortage of new teachers to fill in for the unhappy ones who leave.

Exactly. They get really good benefits and there are housing programs already. And after the first few years the pay is decent to good for a ten month employee and they get tuition benefits for a masters or PhD.

And yet we can’t keep teachers in the classroom. Here we are commenting on a thread about how to incentivize people to stay in the profession.

TEACHERS know that the benefits aren’t worth the agony, but DCUM is here to tell teachers that their jobs are amazing. We’ll keep pretending that the teacher shortage isn’t a thing.

I am an MCPS employee. I know the benefits are great and my pay is not bad. I am a few years away from retiring with my full pension and I am leaving at the end of the school year. The stress and constant changes and demands are no longer worth it. I handed in my retirement papers and feel like the weight of the world has been lifted from my shoulders.

Congratulations! I took 3 years off when my children were younger. The stress, fatigue, and anxiety melted away. I forgot how bad it was, which is why I came back. I won’t be making it much longer and I’ll be kissing full pension goodbye. I don’t care. It isn’t worth my health and happiness.

The posters who love to remind us about the amazing benefits haven’t actually tried the job. The benefits aren’t worth it. At all.

Teaching isn't the only difficult job in the county. Lots of difficult jobs in social service for example. But, you work 10 months, we work 12 months. You get a pension, we don't. You get far better health care than we do, etc. So, yup, try changing jobs to what others do.

Do you work 65-70 hours per week? Teachers do, and that is why they are getting out. The pension isn't enough because the pay isn't enough.

I’m not PP, but, yes, I work 65-70 hours a week. I don’t get paid overtime. I only get 7 federal holidays. I get paged and work on my days off, which are limited. I don’t get good healtcare coverage from my work, but it’s not bad. This is standard in technology. However, I am paid way more than teachers in my present job. That said, at the beginning of my career, I worked even over 100 hours a week and even 36 straight hours before, and I got paid only barely more than my wife, who was a teacher. She’s no longer teaching, but still in the general field. She makes more, but not much more than if she had remained a teacher.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, I'm a "let the whole system burn" teacher. I don't care what happens to it anymore. Truly. 3 years and I'm done. I truly believe there's going to be a whole meltdown, there'll be entire schools that have to close and or class sizes in the 40's or 50's, and eventually special ed will have to be taken over through private insurance. But again, I don't care anymore. This system has chewed me up and spit me out. Let it burn.

There's a small group of posters that get hard at the thought of getting children with special needs out of public schools so that they and their kids won't have to see them anymore.

Keep it in your pants. It isn't going to happen.

I don’t think this was what the PP was saying, but that said, I do think that such a proposal would pass at this point if it was put to a public vote. Classrooms are just far too disruptive now for any learning to take place, and the majority of people are sick of it. The laws should be changed to only allow kids to stay in mainstream classrooms, special ed diagnoses or not, if they do not interfere with the learning of other students.

Sounds good to me.

That's the current law, with the caveat that the school needs to try services and supports for the student that could make the mainstream classroom effective and appropriate.

The law isn't the issue here. The issue is that schools don't want to provide services/supports nor do they want to move students to more restrictive placements because both are expensive.

The law is absolutely the issue. It's the entire issue, in fact. It's a pie-in-the-sky, aspirational list of demands that has never come with even 1/3 of the federal funding necessary to support it. It was badly funded at the time it passed! And now the number of students it's supposed to cover has quadrupled. It's unworkable. It creates a bottomless pit of entitlements with no funding. On what planet does that make sense? The result has been a decades-long shell game where parents rightfully point to a law that says their child has the right to unlimited supports in whatever they need, at someone else's expense, and the school district faces the reality on the ground and in the gap between the two, filling out endless paperwork, are the dwindling staff. IDEA needs to be radically overhauled and some kind of actual legal limits placed on paperwork and meetings and lawsuits so at least the state of affairs is honest for everyone. Literally no other country does it like we do, and there's a reason why. IDEA is completely disintegrating under the weight of its own contradictions.

Why would students with special needs be funded through federal tax dollars instead of state/local tax dollars like other students?

Because it's a federal mandate and forcing states to provide all these supports and services via grand idealistic proclamation and then providing totally inadequate funding to do so is BS. If the states have to fund it then IDEA needs to be made a lot more vague with a lot less requirements and promises so states can actually tailor it to what they can manage. Right now it's like if the feds forced state Medicaid expansion to wider income brackets but gave zero CMS funding to do so and then sued the states when they couldn't get blood out of a stone. It's absurd on its face and it's all falling to pieces.

So, you don't think public schools should have to provide every student with free, appropriate education? If they did as you said and allowed states to "tailor" IDEA, what are you saying they should get rid of?

Not PP—FAPE should be the standard. The problem is that it’s a federal mandate that state and local governments cannot afford. If the federal govt want to provide FAPE (and I think they should), they also need to provide the funding to support it. Without the funding state and local govts can only provide what their budget allows.

Why can’t MCPS hire more paras? Why can’t they create smaller classes? Why can’t they hire more school psychologists? Why can’t they hire more personnel that can attend IEP meetings? It all comes down to money.

It seems to me that the federal govt has the ability to print money or borrow from other governments when it wants do. State and local governments don’t have that ability. They can’t just magically make more money to spend like the federal govt.

FAPE is a wonderful law. It’s implementation and execution sucks.

Why shouldn't states and local governments prioritize, and thus fund, FAPE? The money ultimately comes from the same place.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are already plenty of incentives. The problem is the grass is always greener, but at least there's no shortage of new teachers to fill in for the unhappy ones who leave.

Exactly. They get really good benefits and there are housing programs already. And after the first few years the pay is decent to good for a ten month employee and they get tuition benefits for a masters or PhD.

And yet we can’t keep teachers in the classroom. Here we are commenting on a thread about how to incentivize people to stay in the profession.

TEACHERS know that the benefits aren’t worth the agony, but DCUM is here to tell teachers that their jobs are amazing. We’ll keep pretending that the teacher shortage isn’t a thing.

I am an MCPS employee. I know the benefits are great and my pay is not bad. I am a few years away from retiring with my full pension and I am leaving at the end of the school year. The stress and constant changes and demands are no longer worth it. I handed in my retirement papers and feel like the weight of the world has been lifted from my shoulders.

Congratulations! I took 3 years off when my children were younger. The stress, fatigue, and anxiety melted away. I forgot how bad it was, which is why I came back. I won’t be making it much longer and I’ll be kissing full pension goodbye. I don’t care. It isn’t worth my health and happiness.

The posters who love to remind us about the amazing benefits haven’t actually tried the job. The benefits aren’t worth it. At all.

Teaching isn't the only difficult job in the county. Lots of difficult jobs in social service for example. But, you work 10 months, we work 12 months. You get a pension, we don't. You get far better health care than we do, etc. So, yup, try changing jobs to what others do.

Do you work 65-70 hours per week? Teachers do, and that is why they are getting out. The pension isn't enough because the pay isn't enough.

I’m not PP, but, yes, I work 65-70 hours a week. I don’t get paid overtime. I only get 7 federal holidays. I get paged and work on my days off, which are limited. I don’t get good healtcare coverage from my work, but it’s not bad. This is standard in technology. However, I am paid way more than teachers in my present job. That said, at the beginning of my career, I worked even over 100 hours a week and even 36 straight hours before, and I got paid only barely more than my wife, who was a teacher. She’s no longer teaching, but still in the general field. She makes more, but not much more than if she had remained a teacher.

So the teacher in your relationship quit. That’s the point of this thread. What would she have needed to stay on as a teacher? More pay? More of a work/life balance? More respect? More supportive / useful admin?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are already plenty of incentives. The problem is the grass is always greener, but at least there's no shortage of new teachers to fill in for the unhappy ones who leave.

Exactly. They get really good benefits and there are housing programs already. And after the first few years the pay is decent to good for a ten month employee and they get tuition benefits for a masters or PhD.

And yet we can’t keep teachers in the classroom. Here we are commenting on a thread about how to incentivize people to stay in the profession.

TEACHERS know that the benefits aren’t worth the agony, but DCUM is here to tell teachers that their jobs are amazing. We’ll keep pretending that the teacher shortage isn’t a thing.

I am an MCPS employee. I know the benefits are great and my pay is not bad. I am a few years away from retiring with my full pension and I am leaving at the end of the school year. The stress and constant changes and demands are no longer worth it. I handed in my retirement papers and feel like the weight of the world has been lifted from my shoulders.

Congratulations! I took 3 years off when my children were younger. The stress, fatigue, and anxiety melted away. I forgot how bad it was, which is why I came back. I won’t be making it much longer and I’ll be kissing full pension goodbye. I don’t care. It isn’t worth my health and happiness.

The posters who love to remind us about the amazing benefits haven’t actually tried the job. The benefits aren’t worth it. At all.

Teaching isn't the only difficult job in the county. Lots of difficult jobs in social service for example. But, you work 10 months, we work 12 months. You get a pension, we don't. You get far better health care than we do, etc. So, yup, try changing jobs to what others do.

Do you work 65-70 hours per week? Teachers do, and that is why they are getting out. The pension isn't enough because the pay isn't enough.

I’m not PP, but, yes, I work 65-70 hours a week. I don’t get paid overtime. I only get 7 federal holidays. I get paged and work on my days off, which are limited. I don’t get good healtcare coverage from my work, but it’s not bad. This is standard in technology. However, I am paid way more than teachers in my present job. That said, at the beginning of my career, I worked even over 100 hours a week and even 36 straight hours before, and I got paid only barely more than my wife, who was a teacher. She’s no longer teaching, but still in the general field. She makes more, but not much more than if she had remained a teacher.

So the teacher in your relationship quit. That’s the point of this thread. What would she have needed to stay on as a teacher? More pay? More of a work/life balance? More respect? More supportive / useful admin?

Actually, she didn’t quit. She is still in education, but not in the classroom.