Caitlynn Peetz on teacher

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Caitlynn is now at Education Week rather than Bethesda Beat, alas. She wrote a nice piece on how 'the status of the teaching profession is at its lowest in five decades, new research suggests, which its authors say is “cause for national concern.”'

How could anyone have predicted that 2 years of telling parents that school wasn’t essential and that anyone should be capable of teaching their kids in a couple hours before bed each day would have an impact on the prestige of the teaching profession? I’m shocked.

Obviously, that was always ridiculous, but now we’re left picking up the pieces. We need to attract new teachers, which means increasing *starting* pay. We also need teaching positons to have a better work-life balance by building in more prep time during the school day.

Who could have predicted that nearly three years of vitriol from nasty, selfish, entitled parents about what horrible, dreadful, “selfish”people teachers were (while in the next breath repeatedly demanding to be allowed to put their kids back into the daily care of, and responsibility for, the same terrible, dreadful, “selfish” teachers NOW NOW NOW) would have an effect on teachers not wanting to put up with the BS anymore? I’m shocked.

And good luck finding hundreds of thousands of willing young teachers eager to sign up under these conditions even for more money.

How horrible it was to expect people to do their jobs.

Maybe to ultimately got what we paid for. Once you get past the early years, teachers get paid fairly well for a 10-month public sector job with good benefits, but I certainly understand some positions ultimately demand unreasonably long hours. Quality was bound to suffer. The problem is, people aren’t going to be willing to spend more on teachers (either in terms of pay increases or hiring more to reduce workloads) without good reason to think quality will improve. The temper tantrum teachers unions threw doesn’t bode well for that. So I really don't know how we'll get out of the mess we're in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Caitlynn is now at Education Week rather than Bethesda Beat, alas. She wrote a nice piece on how 'the status of the teaching profession is at its lowest in five decades, new research suggests, which its authors say is “cause for national concern.”'

How could anyone have predicted that 2 years of telling parents that school wasn’t essential and that anyone should be capable of teaching their kids in a couple hours before bed each day would have an impact on the prestige of the teaching profession? I’m shocked.

Obviously, that was always ridiculous, but now we’re left picking up the pieces. We need to attract new teachers, which means increasing *starting* pay. We also need teaching positons to have a better work-life balance by building in more prep time during the school day.

That’s not what happened at all but always amusing to see this. Your revisionist history along with the rest of the angry (and usually overly defensive parents) is just sad. The majority pity people like you. I’m sure this version makes you feel better though, so we can play along.

Eh I remember seeing some pretty petty posts on the MCEA Twitter feed (which have since been scrubbed). Then there was this sort of rhetoric from Randi Weingarten.

The whole "school is not child care" line was a big F U to parents whose livelihoods and careers were at risk. It's also a pretty offensive (and I'd argue racist line, since you know they are contrasting themselves with child care teachers who are largely women of color while the teaching profession has been persistently White after teachers of color were shut out of public school teaching jobs after Brown v Board of Education), as well as untrue (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/13/opinion/coronavirus-schools-child-care-centers.html ). To suggest that teachers' unions didn't contribute at all to the low public perception of their profession is just ridiculous.

I say this as someone who put my grudge to the side and voted for every single Apple Ballot candidate for school board (not because they were on the Apple Ballot but because they were the most qualified candidates).

I see nothing wrong with Randi Weingarten's rhetoric there. Your comments seem like a non sequitur.

The biggest issue is the term "babysitters". The implication which is abundantly clear (and even more clear in the "SCHOOL IS NOT CHILD CARE" shrieking early in the pandemic) is that Weingarten wants to make crystal clear that teachers for school-age children are a higher life form than child care teachers that provide care for young children, and for older children during the summer and after school. A babysitter is a person who watches one or two children for a couple of hours during date night. To equate child care teachers with "babysitters" is so unbelievably offensive and I can't believe it was so widely accepted

But the other issue is just the complete denial that virtual school was a massive burden for parents. Was it the right thing to do, especially at first? Yes. But it was really hard for a lot of parents and Weingarten acts like this is some sort of "gotcha". It is not a respectful way to advocate for the teaching profession.

Having kids is a huge burden but you choose to have them. Most of the parents complaining are richer parents who could afford child care but prefered to spend their money on other things. Babysitters spend all day with kids.... summers, before school aged, after school....

Those are called nannies. Ad public school is not "free", everyone pays for it.

No, they are called either one. And, you need a back up plan.

You can screech "Back up plan!" all you want, that does not change a single thing except remind everyone how incredibly ridiculous your ilk are.

Nope. Your “ilk” are the ones who are ridiculous. You need a backup plan.

P.S. This can happen again. Yes, it can and yes, it will (whether it happens while we all still have young children is a coin flip). Plan accordingly.

Careful what you wish for. How much support do you think would remain for public schools if everyone agreed with you that it is unreasonable to expect schools to stay open?

[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:Caitlynn is now at Education Week rather than Bethesda Beat, alas. She wrote a nice piece on how 'the status of the teaching profession is at its lowest in five decades, new research suggests, which its authors say is “cause for national concern.”'

How could anyone have predicted that 2 years of telling parents that school wasn’t essential and that anyone should be capable of teaching their kids in a couple hours before bed each day would have an impact on the prestige of the teaching profession? I’m shocked.

Obviously, that was always ridiculous, but now we’re left picking up the pieces. We need to attract new teachers, which means increasing *starting* pay. We also need teaching positons to have a better work-life balance by building in more prep time during the school day.

That’s not what happened at all but always amusing to see this. Your revisionist history along with the rest of the angry (and usually overly defensive parents) is just sad. The majority pity people like you. I’m sure this version makes you feel better though, so we can play along.

Eh I remember seeing some pretty petty posts on the MCEA Twitter feed (which have since been scrubbed). Then there was this sort of rhetoric from Randi Weingarten.

The whole "school is not child care" line was a big F U to parents whose livelihoods and careers were at risk. It's also a pretty offensive (and I'd argue racist line, since you know they are contrasting themselves with child care teachers who are largely women of color while the teaching profession has been persistently White after teachers of color were shut out of public school teaching jobs after Brown v Board of Education), as well as untrue (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/13/opinion/coronavirus-schools-child-care-centers.html ). To suggest that teachers' unions didn't contribute at all to the low public perception of their profession is just ridiculous.

I say this as someone who put my grudge to the side and voted for every single Apple Ballot candidate for school board (not because they were on the Apple Ballot but because they were the most qualified candidates).

I see nothing wrong with Randi Weingarten's rhetoric there. Your comments seem like a non sequitur.

The biggest issue is the term "babysitters". The implication which is abundantly clear (and even more clear in the "SCHOOL IS NOT CHILD CARE" shrieking early in the pandemic) is that Weingarten wants to make crystal clear that teachers for school-age children are a higher life form than child care teachers that provide care for young children, and for older children during the summer and after school. A babysitter is a person who watches one or two children for a couple of hours during date night. To equate child care teachers with "babysitters" is so unbelievably offensive and I can't believe it was so widely accepted

But the other issue is just the complete denial that virtual school was a massive burden for parents. Was it the right thing to do, especially at first? Yes. But it was really hard for a lot of parents and Weingarten acts like this is some sort of "gotcha". It is not a respectful way to advocate for the teaching profession.

Having kids is a huge burden but you choose to have them. Most of the parents complaining are richer parents who could afford child care but prefered to spend their money on other things. Babysitters spend all day with kids.... summers, before school aged, after school....

Those are called nannies. Ad public school is not "free", everyone pays for it.

No, they are called either one. And, you need a back up plan.

You can screech "Back up plan!" all you want, that does not change a single thing except remind everyone how incredibly ridiculous your ilk are.

Nope. Your “ilk” are the ones who are ridiculous. You need a backup plan.

P.S. This can happen again. Yes, it can and yes, it will (whether it happens while we all still have young children is a coin flip). Plan accordingly.

Careful what you wish for. How much support do you think would remain for public schools if everyone agreed with you that it is unreasonable to expect schools to stay open?

+1 these people can't get it through their thick skulls that public school is not free, people pay for it and they will use the democratic process to pay less of they aren't getting the same benefit

[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:Caitlynn is now at Education Week rather than Bethesda Beat, alas. She wrote a nice piece on how 'the status of the teaching profession is at its lowest in five decades, new research suggests, which its authors say is “cause for national concern.”'

How could anyone have predicted that 2 years of telling parents that school wasn’t essential and that anyone should be capable of teaching their kids in a couple hours before bed each day would have an impact on the prestige of the teaching profession? I’m shocked.

Obviously, that was always ridiculous, but now we’re left picking up the pieces. We need to attract new teachers, which means increasing *starting* pay. We also need teaching positons to have a better work-life balance by building in more prep time during the school day.

That’s not what happened at all but always amusing to see this. Your revisionist history along with the rest of the angry (and usually overly defensive parents) is just sad. The majority pity people like you. I’m sure this version makes you feel better though, so we can play along.

Eh I remember seeing some pretty petty posts on the MCEA Twitter feed (which have since been scrubbed). Then there was this sort of rhetoric from Randi Weingarten.

The whole "school is not child care" line was a big F U to parents whose livelihoods and careers were at risk. It's also a pretty offensive (and I'd argue racist line, since you know they are contrasting themselves with child care teachers who are largely women of color while the teaching profession has been persistently White after teachers of color were shut out of public school teaching jobs after Brown v Board of Education), as well as untrue (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/13/opinion/coronavirus-schools-child-care-centers.html ). To suggest that teachers' unions didn't contribute at all to the low public perception of their profession is just ridiculous.

I say this as someone who put my grudge to the side and voted for every single Apple Ballot candidate for school board (not because they were on the Apple Ballot but because they were the most qualified candidates).

I see nothing wrong with Randi Weingarten's rhetoric there. Your comments seem like a non sequitur.

The biggest issue is the term "babysitters". The implication which is abundantly clear (and even more clear in the "SCHOOL IS NOT CHILD CARE" shrieking early in the pandemic) is that Weingarten wants to make crystal clear that teachers for school-age children are a higher life form than child care teachers that provide care for young children, and for older children during the summer and after school. A babysitter is a person who watches one or two children for a couple of hours during date night. To equate child care teachers with "babysitters" is so unbelievably offensive and I can't believe it was so widely accepted

But the other issue is just the complete denial that virtual school was a massive burden for parents. Was it the right thing to do, especially at first? Yes. But it was really hard for a lot of parents and Weingarten acts like this is some sort of "gotcha". It is not a respectful way to advocate for the teaching profession.

Having kids is a huge burden but you choose to have them. Most of the parents complaining are richer parents who could afford child care but prefered to spend their money on other things. Babysitters spend all day with kids.... summers, before school aged, after school....

Those are called nannies. Ad public school is not "free", everyone pays for it.

No, they are called either one. And, you need a back up plan.

You can screech "Back up plan!" all you want, that does not change a single thing except remind everyone how incredibly ridiculous your ilk are.

Nope. Your “ilk” are the ones who are ridiculous. You need a backup plan.

P.S. This can happen again. Yes, it can and yes, it will (whether it happens while we all still have young children is a coin flip). Plan accordingly.

Careful what you wish for. How much support do you think would remain for public schools if everyone agreed with you that it is unreasonable to expect schools to stay open?

+1 these people can't get it through their thick skulls that public school is not free, people pay for it and they will use the democratic process to pay less of they aren't getting the same benefit

Lol-man, you people are truly moronic. The only people that will suffer if public schools shut down are kids. You act like teachers are relying on this profession. Nah, most are leaving willingly. It will only continue (due in part to people like you)

[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:Caitlynn is now at Education Week rather than Bethesda Beat, alas. She wrote a nice piece on how 'the status of the teaching profession is at its lowest in five decades, new research suggests, which its authors say is “cause for national concern.”'

How could anyone have predicted that 2 years of telling parents that school wasn’t essential and that anyone should be capable of teaching their kids in a couple hours before bed each day would have an impact on the prestige of the teaching profession? I’m shocked.

Obviously, that was always ridiculous, but now we’re left picking up the pieces. We need to attract new teachers, which means increasing *starting* pay. We also need teaching positons to have a better work-life balance by building in more prep time during the school day.

That’s not what happened at all but always amusing to see this. Your revisionist history along with the rest of the angry (and usually overly defensive parents) is just sad. The majority pity people like you. I’m sure this version makes you feel better though, so we can play along.

Eh I remember seeing some pretty petty posts on the MCEA Twitter feed (which have since been scrubbed). Then there was this sort of rhetoric from Randi Weingarten.

The whole "school is not child care" line was a big F U to parents whose livelihoods and careers were at risk. It's also a pretty offensive (and I'd argue racist line, since you know they are contrasting themselves with child care teachers who are largely women of color while the teaching profession has been persistently White after teachers of color were shut out of public school teaching jobs after Brown v Board of Education), as well as untrue (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/13/opinion/coronavirus-schools-child-care-centers.html ). To suggest that teachers' unions didn't contribute at all to the low public perception of their profession is just ridiculous.

I say this as someone who put my grudge to the side and voted for every single Apple Ballot candidate for school board (not because they were on the Apple Ballot but because they were the most qualified candidates).

I see nothing wrong with Randi Weingarten's rhetoric there. Your comments seem like a non sequitur.

The biggest issue is the term "babysitters". The implication which is abundantly clear (and even more clear in the "SCHOOL IS NOT CHILD CARE" shrieking early in the pandemic) is that Weingarten wants to make crystal clear that teachers for school-age children are a higher life form than child care teachers that provide care for young children, and for older children during the summer and after school. A babysitter is a person who watches one or two children for a couple of hours during date night. To equate child care teachers with "babysitters" is so unbelievably offensive and I can't believe it was so widely accepted

But the other issue is just the complete denial that virtual school was a massive burden for parents. Was it the right thing to do, especially at first? Yes. But it was really hard for a lot of parents and Weingarten acts like this is some sort of "gotcha". It is not a respectful way to advocate for the teaching profession.

Having kids is a huge burden but you choose to have them. Most of the parents complaining are richer parents who could afford child care but prefered to spend their money on other things. Babysitters spend all day with kids.... summers, before school aged, after school....

Those are called nannies. Ad public school is not "free", everyone pays for it.

No, they are called either one. And, you need a back up plan.

You can screech "Back up plan!" all you want, that does not change a single thing except remind everyone how incredibly ridiculous your ilk are.

Nope. Your “ilk” are the ones who are ridiculous. You need a backup plan.

P.S. This can happen again. Yes, it can and yes, it will (whether it happens while we all still have young children is a coin flip). Plan accordingly.

Careful what you wish for. How much support do you think would remain for public schools if everyone agreed with you that it is unreasonable to expect schools to stay open?

+1 these people can't get it through their thick skulls that public school is not free, people pay for it and they will use the democratic process to pay less of they aren't getting the same benefit

Lol-man, you people are truly moronic. The only people that will suffer if public schools shut down are kids. You act like teachers are relying on this profession. Nah, most are leaving willingly. It will only continue (due in part to people like you)

Right. Poorer, darker-skinned kids in particular, since the others will be in private schools.

[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:Caitlynn is now at Education Week rather than Bethesda Beat, alas. She wrote a nice piece on how 'the status of the teaching profession is at its lowest in five decades, new research suggests, which its authors say is “cause for national concern.”'

How could anyone have predicted that 2 years of telling parents that school wasn’t essential and that anyone should be capable of teaching their kids in a couple hours before bed each day would have an impact on the prestige of the teaching profession? I’m shocked.

Obviously, that was always ridiculous, but now we’re left picking up the pieces. We need to attract new teachers, which means increasing *starting* pay. We also need teaching positons to have a better work-life balance by building in more prep time during the school day.

That’s not what happened at all but always amusing to see this. Your revisionist history along with the rest of the angry (and usually overly defensive parents) is just sad. The majority pity people like you. I’m sure this version makes you feel better though, so we can play along.

Eh I remember seeing some pretty petty posts on the MCEA Twitter feed (which have since been scrubbed). Then there was this sort of rhetoric from Randi Weingarten.

The whole "school is not child care" line was a big F U to parents whose livelihoods and careers were at risk. It's also a pretty offensive (and I'd argue racist line, since you know they are contrasting themselves with child care teachers who are largely women of color while the teaching profession has been persistently White after teachers of color were shut out of public school teaching jobs after Brown v Board of Education), as well as untrue (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/13/opinion/coronavirus-schools-child-care-centers.html ). To suggest that teachers' unions didn't contribute at all to the low public perception of their profession is just ridiculous.

I say this as someone who put my grudge to the side and voted for every single Apple Ballot candidate for school board (not because they were on the Apple Ballot but because they were the most qualified candidates).

I see nothing wrong with Randi Weingarten's rhetoric there. Your comments seem like a non sequitur.

The biggest issue is the term "babysitters". The implication which is abundantly clear (and even more clear in the "SCHOOL IS NOT CHILD CARE" shrieking early in the pandemic) is that Weingarten wants to make crystal clear that teachers for school-age children are a higher life form than child care teachers that provide care for young children, and for older children during the summer and after school. A babysitter is a person who watches one or two children for a couple of hours during date night. To equate child care teachers with "babysitters" is so unbelievably offensive and I can't believe it was so widely accepted

But the other issue is just the complete denial that virtual school was a massive burden for parents. Was it the right thing to do, especially at first? Yes. But it was really hard for a lot of parents and Weingarten acts like this is some sort of "gotcha". It is not a respectful way to advocate for the teaching profession.

Having kids is a huge burden but you choose to have them. Most of the parents complaining are richer parents who could afford child care but prefered to spend their money on other things. Babysitters spend all day with kids.... summers, before school aged, after school....

Those are called nannies. Ad public school is not "free", everyone pays for it.

No, they are called either one. And, you need a back up plan.

You can screech "Back up plan!" all you want, that does not change a single thing except remind everyone how incredibly ridiculous your ilk are.

Nope. Your “ilk” are the ones who are ridiculous. You need a backup plan.

P.S. This can happen again. Yes, it can and yes, it will (whether it happens while we all still have young children is a coin flip). Plan accordingly.

Careful what you wish for. How much support do you think would remain for public schools if everyone agreed with you that it is unreasonable to expect schools to stay open?

+1 these people can't get it through their thick skulls that public school is not free, people pay for it and they will use the democratic process to pay less of they aren't getting the same benefit

Lol-man, you people are truly moronic. The only people that will suffer if public schools shut down are kids. You act like teachers are relying on this profession. Nah, most are leaving willingly. It will only continue (due in part to people like you)

Right. Poorer, darker-skinned kids in particular, since the others will be in private schools.

So to review y'all are rooting for schools to shut down again so BIPOC kids can get harmed even more? I thought virtual was fine, if it wasn't it was the parents' fault and BIPOC kids benefited the most from it, according to you.

[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:Caitlynn is now at Education Week rather than Bethesda Beat, alas. She wrote a nice piece on how 'the status of the teaching profession is at its lowest in five decades, new research suggests, which its authors say is “cause for national concern.”'

How could anyone have predicted that 2 years of telling parents that school wasn’t essential and that anyone should be capable of teaching their kids in a couple hours before bed each day would have an impact on the prestige of the teaching profession? I’m shocked.

Obviously, that was always ridiculous, but now we’re left picking up the pieces. We need to attract new teachers, which means increasing *starting* pay. We also need teaching positons to have a better work-life balance by building in more prep time during the school day.

That’s not what happened at all but always amusing to see this. Your revisionist history along with the rest of the angry (and usually overly defensive parents) is just sad. The majority pity people like you. I’m sure this version makes you feel better though, so we can play along.

Eh I remember seeing some pretty petty posts on the MCEA Twitter feed (which have since been scrubbed). Then there was this sort of rhetoric from Randi Weingarten.

The whole "school is not child care" line was a big F U to parents whose livelihoods and careers were at risk. It's also a pretty offensive (and I'd argue racist line, since you know they are contrasting themselves with child care teachers who are largely women of color while the teaching profession has been persistently White after teachers of color were shut out of public school teaching jobs after Brown v Board of Education), as well as untrue (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/13/opinion/coronavirus-schools-child-care-centers.html ). To suggest that teachers' unions didn't contribute at all to the low public perception of their profession is just ridiculous.

I say this as someone who put my grudge to the side and voted for every single Apple Ballot candidate for school board (not because they were on the Apple Ballot but because they were the most qualified candidates).

I see nothing wrong with Randi Weingarten's rhetoric there. Your comments seem like a non sequitur.

The biggest issue is the term "babysitters". The implication which is abundantly clear (and even more clear in the "SCHOOL IS NOT CHILD CARE" shrieking early in the pandemic) is that Weingarten wants to make crystal clear that teachers for school-age children are a higher life form than child care teachers that provide care for young children, and for older children during the summer and after school. A babysitter is a person who watches one or two children for a couple of hours during date night. To equate child care teachers with "babysitters" is so unbelievably offensive and I can't believe it was so widely accepted

But the other issue is just the complete denial that virtual school was a massive burden for parents. Was it the right thing to do, especially at first? Yes. But it was really hard for a lot of parents and Weingarten acts like this is some sort of "gotcha". It is not a respectful way to advocate for the teaching profession.

Having kids is a huge burden but you choose to have them. Most of the parents complaining are richer parents who could afford child care but prefered to spend their money on other things. Babysitters spend all day with kids.... summers, before school aged, after school....

Those are called nannies. Ad public school is not "free", everyone pays for it.

No, they are called either one. And, you need a back up plan.

You can screech "Back up plan!" all you want, that does not change a single thing except remind everyone how incredibly ridiculous your ilk are.

Nope. Your “ilk” are the ones who are ridiculous. You need a backup plan.

P.S. This can happen again. Yes, it can and yes, it will (whether it happens while we all still have young children is a coin flip). Plan accordingly.

Careful what you wish for. How much support do you think would remain for public schools if everyone agreed with you that it is unreasonable to expect schools to stay open?

+1 these people can't get it through their thick skulls that public school is not free, people pay for it and they will use the democratic process to pay less of they aren't getting the same benefit

Lol-man, you people are truly moronic. The only people that will suffer if public schools shut down are kids. You act like teachers are relying on this profession. Nah, most are leaving willingly. It will only continue (due in part to people like you)

Right. Poorer, darker-skinned kids in particular, since the others will be in private schools.

So to review y'all are rooting for schools to shut down again so BIPOC kids can get harmed even more? I thought virtual was fine, if it wasn't it was the parents' fault and BIPOC kids benefited the most from it, according to you.

The school closure crowd— including the teachers' unions— never cared about anyone or anything beyond their own anxiety.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Caitlynn is now at Education Week rather than Bethesda Beat, alas. She wrote a nice piece on how 'the status of the teaching profession is at its lowest in five decades, new research suggests, which its authors say is “cause for national concern.”'

How could anyone have predicted that 2 years of telling parents that school wasn’t essential and that anyone should be capable of teaching their kids in a couple hours before bed each day would have an impact on the prestige of the teaching profession? I’m shocked.

Obviously, that was always ridiculous, but now we’re left picking up the pieces. We need to attract new teachers, which means increasing *starting* pay. We also need teaching positons to have a better work-life balance by building in more prep time during the school day.

Who could have predicted that nearly three years of vitriol from nasty, selfish, entitled parents about what horrible, dreadful, “selfish”people teachers were (while in the next breath repeatedly demanding to be allowed to put their kids back into the daily care of, and responsibility for, the same terrible, dreadful, “selfish” teachers NOW NOW NOW) would have an effect on teachers not wanting to put up with the BS anymore? I’m shocked.

And good luck finding hundreds of thousands of willing young teachers eager to sign up under these conditions even for more money.

I'll say that for the most part, my kids' teachers were decent during the pandemic. I mean I heard them! But large swaths of the curriculum and instruction hours were cut. 2 hours for math per week just doesn't cut it. (And have we already forgotten asynchronous Wednesday?) My kid did not absorb the material remotely and is one of the many many kids having a hard time now in Algebra II. As a teacher, it doesn't sound like this means much to you. Every single teacher, department head, and assistant principal say it's on my kid to learn the material that was either cut or poorly taught due to the remote nature of the instruction. Do you not see how frustrating it is and why people are still angry? Regardless of the quality of any individual teacher, but it was teachers through their union that pushed to keep school remote. In fairness, MCPS was okay. But Weingarten, Fairfax County, etc were pretty maddening.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What Weingarten was essentially saying is, hey WE insisted in-person education is not essential, and now YOU all have finally come to your senses that it IS essential because it is not possible for parents to do teachers' jobs. Do you get how nonsensical that is?

You aren't doing a teachers job, you are doing the job of a parent.

That's not correct. You are doing the job of a learning coach, supporting the education delivered virtually according to a schedule you did not establish as a parent. Learning coaches in online schools must spend more time being involved in their kids' online learning than they are in a traditional school arrangement. Acting as a learning coach throughout a business day is not an expected duty for parents of kids attending in-person school. Many online academies require parents to sign agreements acknowledging their responsibilities as learning coaches. When I looked at online learning for my kids, parents were that they should expect to devote 5-6 hours per day supervising their kids' online learning.

I admire your attempts to explain the issue. If someone does not understand by November 2022, they are willfully blind.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Caitlynn is now at Education Week rather than Bethesda Beat, alas. She wrote a nice piece on how 'the status of the teaching profession is at its lowest in five decades, new research suggests, which its authors say is “cause for national concern.”'

How could anyone have predicted that 2 years of telling parents that school wasn’t essential and that anyone should be capable of teaching their kids in a couple hours before bed each day would have an impact on the prestige of the teaching profession? I’m shocked.

Obviously, that was always ridiculous, but now we’re left picking up the pieces. We need to attract new teachers, which means increasing *starting* pay. We also need teaching positons to have a better work-life balance by building in more prep time during the school day.

I've been teaching nearly 3 decades, and I am unaware of a time there was any "prestige" in teaching. Maybe we weren't hated 20 years ago. Is that what you meant?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Caitlynn is now at Education Week rather than Bethesda Beat, alas. She wrote a nice piece on how 'the status of the teaching profession is at its lowest in five decades, new research suggests, which its authors say is “cause for national concern.”'

How could anyone have predicted that 2 years of telling parents that school wasn’t essential and that anyone should be capable of teaching their kids in a couple hours before bed each day would have an impact on the prestige of the teaching profession? I’m shocked.

Obviously, that was always ridiculous, but now we’re left picking up the pieces. We need to attract new teachers, which means increasing *starting* pay. We also need teaching positons to have a better work-life balance by building in more prep time during the school day.

Who could have predicted that nearly three years of vitriol from nasty, selfish, entitled parents about what horrible, dreadful, “selfish”people teachers were (while in the next breath repeatedly demanding to be allowed to put their kids back into the daily care of, and responsibility for, the same terrible, dreadful, “selfish” teachers NOW NOW NOW) would have an effect on teachers not wanting to put up with the BS anymore? I’m shocked.

And good luck finding hundreds of thousands of willing young teachers eager to sign up under these conditions even for more money.

I'll say that for the most part, my kids' teachers were decent during the pandemic. I mean I heard them! But large swaths of the curriculum and instruction hours were cut. 2 hours for math per week just doesn't cut it. (And have we already forgotten asynchronous Wednesday?) My kid did not absorb the material remotely and is one of the many many kids having a hard time now in Algebra II. As a teacher, it doesn't sound like this means much to you. Every single teacher, department head, and assistant principal say it's on my kid to learn the material that was either cut or poorly taught due to the remote nature of the instruction. Do you not see how frustrating it is and why people are still angry? Regardless of the quality of any individual teacher, but it was teachers through their union that pushed to keep school remote. In fairness, MCPS was okay. But Weingarten, Fairfax County, etc were pretty maddening.

MCPS is offering free tutoring to help your child. However, they were in person last year and this year so if they are struggling maybe the math track is to hard for them or they need more support and you or a free tutor needs to provide it.

[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:Caitlynn is now at Education Week rather than Bethesda Beat, alas. She wrote a nice piece on how 'the status of the teaching profession is at its lowest in five decades, new research suggests, which its authors say is “cause for national concern.”'

How could anyone have predicted that 2 years of telling parents that school wasn’t essential and that anyone should be capable of teaching their kids in a couple hours before bed each day would have an impact on the prestige of the teaching profession? I’m shocked.

Obviously, that was always ridiculous, but now we’re left picking up the pieces. We need to attract new teachers, which means increasing *starting* pay. We also need teaching positons to have a better work-life balance by building in more prep time during the school day.

That’s not what happened at all but always amusing to see this. Your revisionist history along with the rest of the angry (and usually overly defensive parents) is just sad. The majority pity people like you. I’m sure this version makes you feel better though, so we can play along.

Eh I remember seeing some pretty petty posts on the MCEA Twitter feed (which have since been scrubbed). Then there was this sort of rhetoric from Randi Weingarten.

The whole "school is not child care" line was a big F U to parents whose livelihoods and careers were at risk. It's also a pretty offensive (and I'd argue racist line, since you know they are contrasting themselves with child care teachers who are largely women of color while the teaching profession has been persistently White after teachers of color were shut out of public school teaching jobs after Brown v Board of Education), as well as untrue (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/13/opinion/coronavirus-schools-child-care-centers.html ). To suggest that teachers' unions didn't contribute at all to the low public perception of their profession is just ridiculous.

I say this as someone who put my grudge to the side and voted for every single Apple Ballot candidate for school board (not because they were on the Apple Ballot but because they were the most qualified candidates).

I see nothing wrong with Randi Weingarten's rhetoric there. Your comments seem like a non sequitur.

The biggest issue is the term "babysitters". The implication which is abundantly clear (and even more clear in the "SCHOOL IS NOT CHILD CARE" shrieking early in the pandemic) is that Weingarten wants to make crystal clear that teachers for school-age children are a higher life form than child care teachers that provide care for young children, and for older children during the summer and after school. A babysitter is a person who watches one or two children for a couple of hours during date night. To equate child care teachers with "babysitters" is so unbelievably offensive and I can't believe it was so widely accepted

But the other issue is just the complete denial that virtual school was a massive burden for parents. Was it the right thing to do, especially at first? Yes. But it was really hard for a lot of parents and Weingarten acts like this is some sort of "gotcha". It is not a respectful way to advocate for the teaching profession.

Having kids is a huge burden but you choose to have them. Most of the parents complaining are richer parents who could afford child care but prefered to spend their money on other things. Babysitters spend all day with kids.... summers, before school aged, after school....

Those are called nannies. Ad public school is not "free", everyone pays for it.

No, they are called either one. And, you need a back up plan.

You can screech "Back up plan!" all you want, that does not change a single thing except remind everyone how incredibly ridiculous your ilk are.

Nope. Your “ilk” are the ones who are ridiculous. You need a backup plan.

P.S. This can happen again. Yes, it can and yes, it will (whether it happens while we all still have young children is a coin flip). Plan accordingly.

Careful what you wish for. How much support do you think would remain for public schools if everyone agreed with you that it is unreasonable to expect schools to stay open?

+1 these people can't get it through their thick skulls that public school is not free, people pay for it and they will use the democratic process to pay less of they aren't getting the same benefit

Lol-man, you people are truly moronic. The only people that will suffer if public schools shut down are kids. You act like teachers are relying on this profession. Nah, most are leaving willingly. It will only continue (due in part to people like you)

Right. Poorer, darker-skinned kids in particular, since the others will be in private schools.

So to review y'all are rooting for schools to shut down again so BIPOC kids can get harmed even more? I thought virtual was fine, if it wasn't it was the parents' fault and BIPOC kids benefited the most from it, according to you.

The school closure crowd— including the teachers' unions— never cared about anyone or anything beyond their own anxiety.

And, you don't care about anyone but your own selfish need for free child care. How many got sick and died? How many kids lost a parent? How many of those kids brought home covid to their parents that caused them to die and have to live with that?

[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:Caitlynn is now at Education Week rather than Bethesda Beat, alas. She wrote a nice piece on how 'the status of the teaching profession is at its lowest in five decades, new research suggests, which its authors say is “cause for national concern.”'

How could anyone have predicted that 2 years of telling parents that school wasn’t essential and that anyone should be capable of teaching their kids in a couple hours before bed each day would have an impact on the prestige of the teaching profession? I’m shocked.

Obviously, that was always ridiculous, but now we’re left picking up the pieces. We need to attract new teachers, which means increasing *starting* pay. We also need teaching positons to have a better work-life balance by building in more prep time during the school day.

That’s not what happened at all but always amusing to see this. Your revisionist history along with the rest of the angry (and usually overly defensive parents) is just sad. The majority pity people like you. I’m sure this version makes you feel better though, so we can play along.

Eh I remember seeing some pretty petty posts on the MCEA Twitter feed (which have since been scrubbed). Then there was this sort of rhetoric from Randi Weingarten.

The whole "school is not child care" line was a big F U to parents whose livelihoods and careers were at risk. It's also a pretty offensive (and I'd argue racist line, since you know they are contrasting themselves with child care teachers who are largely women of color while the teaching profession has been persistently White after teachers of color were shut out of public school teaching jobs after Brown v Board of Education), as well as untrue (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/13/opinion/coronavirus-schools-child-care-centers.html ). To suggest that teachers' unions didn't contribute at all to the low public perception of their profession is just ridiculous.

I say this as someone who put my grudge to the side and voted for every single Apple Ballot candidate for school board (not because they were on the Apple Ballot but because they were the most qualified candidates).

I see nothing wrong with Randi Weingarten's rhetoric there. Your comments seem like a non sequitur.

The biggest issue is the term "babysitters". The implication which is abundantly clear (and even more clear in the "SCHOOL IS NOT CHILD CARE" shrieking early in the pandemic) is that Weingarten wants to make crystal clear that teachers for school-age children are a higher life form than child care teachers that provide care for young children, and for older children during the summer and after school. A babysitter is a person who watches one or two children for a couple of hours during date night. To equate child care teachers with "babysitters" is so unbelievably offensive and I can't believe it was so widely accepted

But the other issue is just the complete denial that virtual school was a massive burden for parents. Was it the right thing to do, especially at first? Yes. But it was really hard for a lot of parents and Weingarten acts like this is some sort of "gotcha". It is not a respectful way to advocate for the teaching profession.

Having kids is a huge burden but you choose to have them. Most of the parents complaining are richer parents who could afford child care but prefered to spend their money on other things. Babysitters spend all day with kids.... summers, before school aged, after school....

Those are called nannies. Ad public school is not "free", everyone pays for it.

No, they are called either one. And, you need a back up plan.

You can screech "Back up plan!" all you want, that does not change a single thing except remind everyone how incredibly ridiculous your ilk are.

Nope. Your “ilk” are the ones who are ridiculous. You need a backup plan.

P.S. This can happen again. Yes, it can and yes, it will (whether it happens while we all still have young children is a coin flip). Plan accordingly.

I mean I have a flexible WFH job with extensive amounts of leave built up so too bad so sad I am not going to suffer they way you clearly hope I will. I don't doubt there will be another pandemic at some point, but policymakers will not be bowing to the psychotic teachers unions so easily next time.

The issue had nothing to do with the teachers union.

[Anonymous]

Amazing how the article says the problems for teachers started more than 10 years ago but everyone here just wants to talk covid. DCUM gonna DCUM.

[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:Caitlynn is now at Education Week rather than Bethesda Beat, alas. She wrote a nice piece on how 'the status of the teaching profession is at its lowest in five decades, new research suggests, which its authors say is “cause for national concern.”'

How could anyone have predicted that 2 years of telling parents that school wasn’t essential and that anyone should be capable of teaching their kids in a couple hours before bed each day would have an impact on the prestige of the teaching profession? I’m shocked.

Obviously, that was always ridiculous, but now we’re left picking up the pieces. We need to attract new teachers, which means increasing *starting* pay. We also need teaching positons to have a better work-life balance by building in more prep time during the school day.

That’s not what happened at all but always amusing to see this. Your revisionist history along with the rest of the angry (and usually overly defensive parents) is just sad. The majority pity people like you. I’m sure this version makes you feel better though, so we can play along.

Eh I remember seeing some pretty petty posts on the MCEA Twitter feed (which have since been scrubbed). Then there was this sort of rhetoric from Randi Weingarten.

The whole "school is not child care" line was a big F U to parents whose livelihoods and careers were at risk. It's also a pretty offensive (and I'd argue racist line, since you know they are contrasting themselves with child care teachers who are largely women of color while the teaching profession has been persistently White after teachers of color were shut out of public school teaching jobs after Brown v Board of Education), as well as untrue (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/13/opinion/coronavirus-schools-child-care-centers.html ). To suggest that teachers' unions didn't contribute at all to the low public perception of their profession is just ridiculous.

I say this as someone who put my grudge to the side and voted for every single Apple Ballot candidate for school board (not because they were on the Apple Ballot but because they were the most qualified candidates).

I see nothing wrong with Randi Weingarten's rhetoric there. Your comments seem like a non sequitur.

The biggest issue is the term "babysitters". The implication which is abundantly clear (and even more clear in the "SCHOOL IS NOT CHILD CARE" shrieking early in the pandemic) is that Weingarten wants to make crystal clear that teachers for school-age children are a higher life form than child care teachers that provide care for young children, and for older children during the summer and after school. A babysitter is a person who watches one or two children for a couple of hours during date night. To equate child care teachers with "babysitters" is so unbelievably offensive and I can't believe it was so widely accepted

But the other issue is just the complete denial that virtual school was a massive burden for parents. Was it the right thing to do, especially at first? Yes. But it was really hard for a lot of parents and Weingarten acts like this is some sort of "gotcha". It is not a respectful way to advocate for the teaching profession.

Having kids is a huge burden but you choose to have them. Most of the parents complaining are richer parents who could afford child care but prefered to spend their money on other things. Babysitters spend all day with kids.... summers, before school aged, after school....

Those are called nannies. Ad public school is not "free", everyone pays for it.

No, they are called either one. And, you need a back up plan.

You can screech "Back up plan!" all you want, that does not change a single thing except remind everyone how incredibly ridiculous your ilk are.

Nope. Your “ilk” are the ones who are ridiculous. You need a backup plan.

P.S. This can happen again. Yes, it can and yes, it will (whether it happens while we all still have young children is a coin flip). Plan accordingly.

I mean I have a flexible WFH job with extensive amounts of leave built up so too bad so sad I am not going to suffer they way you clearly hope I will. I don't doubt there will be another pandemic at some point, but policymakers will not be bowing to the psychotic teachers unions so easily next time.

The issue had nothing to do with the teachers union.

Are you forgetting the threatened and actual illegal teacher strikes?