Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Teachers never seem to be aware of how benefits work outside of the teaching profession.

How much do teachers pay for their health insurance?

How much do teachers pay for their retirement? In DCPS, it is 8%.

What do teachers get for their retirement? Suppose a teacher worked from 25-65. They'd earn more than 75% of their salary as a defined benefit retirement package. Find me a private sector job in which you received 75% of your salary in retirement from just this one prong? (https://dcrb.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/dcrb/publication/attachments/SPD_Teachers_Plan_2017_Final_6-5-2018.pdf)

What does this have to do with the discussion on flexible scheduling?

Everything in life is tradeoffs. You cannot complain about a bad thing without properly judging it as penance for a good thing.

Yes, your schedule is inflexible. But it also includes relatively lavish retirement benefits, summers off, and other perks.

Likewise, cops and military can retire at 20 years with full benefits (instead of the more common 30 years). This isn't some perk-from-nowhere; it is compensation for a job in which they risk their lives and undergo physical hardship.

So, generous retirement has everything to do with inflexible daily schedules since a job is a package of attributes, not just some random things cobbled together without a connection to each other.

Considering teachers are not making it 10+ years in the field, maybe this retirement benefit isn't as big of a carrot as you think it is.

Au contraire: average number of years of teaching experience is about 15 years. See https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2007/ruraled/tables/tablea3_8.asp

That data is from 2004. I started my career in 03. This job is 3x harder now.

I cannot believe that person posted data from NINETEEN YEARS AGO and really thought they said something of substance. How glorious.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This sounds like a nightmare for schools. How are they going to cover teachers regularly being out for half a day? My kid has an IEP and the teachers are legally required to be present for the meetings, and it's hard enough to coordinate coverage for that.

No
Ma’am. They are required to give input.
Schools had better start offering work settings that mirror the work from home perks.

Teaching is by its nature not a flexible job. And teachers are usually free by 3:15 and all summer … not to mention three weeks of break during the school year.

Teaching is a very flexible job. Summer off, tons of school holidays, nice winter and spring breaks. They finish the day early enough to run errands and do appointments after work. Plus the planning periods during the work day to catch up. Lots of flexibility and perks.

There are a lot of perks to teaching (and tons if hard work) but it is not flexible. It is one of the few jobs where you cannot take off without doing a ton of work to prepare for that absence (or deal with the consequences of your kids not learning and bring a mess for the sub). The summer off is great but I feel lucky my husband has a more flexible programming job. He winds up taking care of covering all sick kid days and random couple of hours off to meet plumber or similar things. It is really stressful to be absent as a teacher. We do have the school breaks but no flexibility in taking off. So yes- teachers get more days off than most but the job is not flexible.

What are you talking about? This is true of every white-collar job.

So you’re just outright lying now? Good to know.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's a report from a teacher advocacy group in DC that lists a lot of models for what flexible scheduling could look like: https://www.weareempowered.org/flexiblescheduling.html

I cannot believe the utter freakin’ nerve of that group. Four of their suggestions involve reducing instructional time for kids, when kids are still struggling to recover from the school closures. Seriously, stfu.

Nope. Sorry. It’s 2023. This tired, stale excuse is expired. Try again.

you don’t get to fiat it out of existence.

+1

There are reports coming out on the regular about how children in DC are still impacted by pandemic learning losses caused by s extended school closures. It’s embarrassing that people are ignoring this impact ON CHILDREN.

No one is ignoring this but do you think staffing shortages (teachers, social workers, speech pathologists, aides, etc) have zero impact on children?
We will never be able to fill a gap with staffing shortages or teachers who are so burnt out they aren't giving their best anymore.

You really can't sit here and say 'it's only about children,' because for school staff it is still a job. This is what teachers mean by we are not martyrs, we cannot help our students if we don't have the capacity or means to do so. You must also have known many school budgets were cut and now schools must excess 1-6 staff members.

It’s execrable that you are pulling this again. Stop holding kids hostage. Parents are in favor of more support for teachers, but NOT less classroom time for our kids. Come up with other solutions.

Are you always this absurdly melodramatic, or only on DCUM?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This sounds like a nightmare for schools. How are they going to cover teachers regularly being out for half a day? My kid has an IEP and the teachers are legally required to be present for the meetings, and it's hard enough to coordinate coverage for that.

No
Ma’am. They are required to give input.
Schools had better start offering work settings that mirror the work from home perks.

Teach for an online school and you'll get "work from home perks."

Oh, STFU.

Why? Seems like a fair point.

It isn’t a “fair point” in the slightest.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's a report from a teacher advocacy group in DC that lists a lot of models for what flexible scheduling could look like: https://www.weareempowered.org/flexiblescheduling.html

I cannot believe the utter freakin’ nerve of that group. Four of their suggestions involve reducing instructional time for kids, when kids are still struggling to recover from the school closures. Seriously, stfu.

Nope. Sorry. It’s 2023. This tired, stale excuse is expired. Try again.

you don’t get to fiat it out of existence.

I don’t have to. It’s a tired, idiotic excuse perseverated endlessly upon by idiotic people. I can’t stop them from refusing to grow up and move on, but I will continue to point it out every time they trot out the same tired, stale, empty line.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This sounds like a nightmare for schools. How are they going to cover teachers regularly being out for half a day? My kid has an IEP and the teachers are legally required to be present for the meetings, and it's hard enough to coordinate coverage for that.

No
Ma’am. They are required to give input.
Schools had better start offering work settings that mirror the work from home perks.

Teaching is by its nature not a flexible job. And teachers are usually free by 3:15 and all summer … not to mention three weeks of break during the school year.

I’m so tired of hearing this. That simply means that at 3:15, I can pick my own time to do the extra 4 hours of work I still have to get done that day. (Kind of like weekends. I still have to work 10-12 hours, but I can actually pick which hours. Lucky me.) And summers? I figure that’s my break for the 60-70 hour weeks I’ve been working all year. Summer is the only time I can take care of my own needs: my own appointments, my rare chance to get to the gym, etc.

Ditto! While I don’t put in quite as many hours as the PP after 3:15 and on weekends, I do have some perspective from both the teaching and non-teaching work worlds. What people who don’t teach probably have no way to understand is that teachers usually have zero time during a typical day to even place a phone call or go to the bathroom or even eat lunch. The needs for coverage of classes and hall/lunch/recess (in elementary) are HUGE. You are needed every second of every day and you are ON for the entire time. In a previous career, I estimate that I was ON during about 20% of my day. By that I mean that I was directly interacting with others or presenting information. It’s the most draining and demanding part of your day. There are certainly other types of jobs where this constant level of interaction and responsibility is demanded also (health care, restaurant work, public-facing service jobs). But teachers face another career-specific drain on their time and energy too. You are trying to convince a room full of young people to do things they don’t necessarily want to do (academic work, pro-social behavior) ALL DAY LONG. It’s exhausting. So, although I might get home at 4:30, know that I may be only then getting to self-care things that others incorporate into their days such as using the bathroom, eating, calling a plumber, taking a moment to breathe or rest for a few minutes. In other words it is an INTENSE job. Also known that I arrive at work at 7:30, rather than the typical 9 am. If I could have a recuperation day a on Wednesdays, for example, I could remain in this job another 10 years. As it is, I plan on only one more year because I’m just too exhausted. I can get paid more to take an education related work from home job. Them’s the facts.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a dcps teacher, really this argument is silly.

Teachers yes would like a few more sick days, thank you.

But really we want our already short 45 minute planning to be guaranteed and students come in at 8:40, unless in before care.

Technically we are supposed to have the mornings 2/5 days. It should be 4/5.


And really I’m confused why this forum doesn’t know IMPACT (our evaluation) is the #1 reason teachers leave dcps.
Then for sped it is because they really do not allow us to provide FAPE.

I REALLY don’t need a 4 day work week or virtual, I need my planning time, I don’t need to cover other classes, I need my TA. The council is just throwing teachers a bone. They better fix that para pay quickly or you’ll see even more ECE-K1 and self contained teachers quit. No support equals less learning.

The surveys of teachers don't list IMPACT as a reason why teachers leave DCPS. From uplink, this EmpowerEd report doesn't put doing anything to IMPACT in the top 10 solutions to them remaining in their job.

https://www.weareempowered.org/uploads/2/6/1/4/2614188/report_flexible_scheduling_for_schools.pdf

https://dcps.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/dcps/page_content/attachments/Teacher-Retention-Memo_IMPACT-Review_August-2021.pdf


It is one of the top 3 reasons, you can ask any DCPS teacher. This is coming from a teacher who has only received a highly effective score.

Para thing doesn’t impact all teachers so admittedly some don’t care but I promise every ECE-K/1 teacher does and every self contained teacher. But special education is a big deal and it matters. So does ECE especially when that’s one of DCPS’s selling points.

I was more responding to your phrasing "really I’m confused why this forum doesn’t know IMPACT (our evaluation) is the #1 reason teachers leave dcps." It's because the studies don't show that to be true. Heck, even the study you linked to put it as the 6th highest reason. So it's not unimportant, but the data suggests your viewpoint may not be widely shared (despite you thinking it is). If everyone doesn't agree with you, then why would this forum know what's in your brain?

But if you are right and it is the most important reason for lack of retention, why isn't the Council listening to teachers and aiming at IMPACT to increase retention? Instead they have this bill which may not be funded, focusing on flexibility.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More questions:

Would more time out of school exacerbate behavioral issues with kids in school?

Would more time out of school increase or decrease chronic absenteeism (linked to greater likelihood of committing crimes in DC)?

Why doesn't the DC Council bill call for the input from parents or students in the pilot programs?

When would the pilot programs be announced? Would it be enough time for people to switch schools?

Hahahaha like parents with kids who are chronically absent vote! This starts in PK where kids rely on the parent(s).

So, I imagine that's true. But there are non-parent voters who don't like crime, and perhaps have noticed the high rates of youth crime in the city, and maybe would prefer it not get higher.

Your point seems to be: parents don't care that their kids go to school, so might as well have less school. Is that your point?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Back to the point of the thread: It seems like 'flexible scheduling' largely involves less instructional time. This time may be replaced by other activities, but seemingly this requires other people to be employed.

The Council passed a bill, but who decides whether the bill will be funded?

Since apparently it is impossible to hire teachers, why is there a belief that more educational professionals could be hired?

What does less instructional time mean for students, if it is not replaced by something like intensive tutoring?

What does reduced school time mean for where students spend time? Where do they go at 1:30 on Wednesday if their parents work?

What sorts of parents can make a 4-day-work week 'work'?

There a quite a few charters who end early one day a week. I don’t have time to look, but what do parents do there?

I don’t really care. I think it’s unacceptable in charters too.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a dcps teacher, really this argument is silly.

Teachers yes would like a few more sick days, thank you.

But really we want our already short 45 minute planning to be guaranteed and students come in at 8:40, unless in before care.

Technically we are supposed to have the mornings 2/5 days. It should be 4/5.


And really I’m confused why this forum doesn’t know IMPACT (our evaluation) is the #1 reason teachers leave dcps.
Then for sped it is because they really do not allow us to provide FAPE.

I REALLY don’t need a 4 day work week or virtual, I need my planning time, I don’t need to cover other classes, I need my TA. The council is just throwing teachers a bone. They better fix that para pay quickly or you’ll see even more ECE-K1 and self contained teachers quit. No support equals less learning.

The surveys of teachers don't list IMPACT as a reason why teachers leave DCPS. From uplink, this EmpowerEd report doesn't put doing anything to IMPACT in the top 10 solutions to them remaining in their job.

https://www.weareempowered.org/uploads/2/6/1/4/2614188/report_flexible_scheduling_for_schools.pdf

https://dcps.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/dcps/page_content/attachments/Teacher-Retention-Memo_IMPACT-Review_August-2021.pdf


It is one of the top 3 reasons, you can ask any DCPS teacher. This is coming from a teacher who has only received a highly effective score.

Para thing doesn’t impact all teachers so admittedly some don’t care but I promise every ECE-K/1 teacher does and every self contained teacher. But special education is a big deal and it matters. So does ECE especially when that’s one of DCPS’s selling points.

Anonymous wrote:More questions:

Would more time out of school exacerbate behavioral issues with kids in school?

Would more time out of school increase or decrease chronic absenteeism (linked to greater likelihood of committing crimes in DC)?

Why doesn't the DC Council bill call for the input from parents or students in the pilot programs?

When would the pilot programs be announced? Would it be enough time for people to switch schools?

Hahahaha like parents with kids who are chronically absent vote! This starts in PK where kids rely on the parent(s).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I too think teachers should have more flexibility and we need additional people who are trained in delivering student education or offering a safe space at school so that is possible for students.

Unfortunately, the current UPSFF formula is based on a certain model and finding the funding to have more people in a building to not only cover, but enrich the student experience is going to require the UPSFF to be appropriately funded.

ICYMI there have been advocates that testify to this every year during the budget season. The UPSFF advisory group says "it takes x amount of money to do all the things that have to happen to adequately support students. The recommendations have not been followed for more than a decade.

So, when I see DC Council step up with a bill like this, it makes me want to scream in their faces...WHERE HAVE YOU BEEN?

It is so sad to see this board and our communities divide on this topic. We need more staffing and support in our schools and we need to PAY FOR IT.

I realize people think DCPS central office is bloated and DC Charter school salaries are too high...blah, blah, blah. That is all just noise.

An independent group of experts told DC council and executive to fund at one level and they never have. Let's put the blame where it belongs, not with parents or teachers who want more.

This makes a lot of sense. Who makes up the UPSFF advisory group? What part of government is it in? How do we support them or advocate for them?

The review happens only every few years. Here is a link to the DME materials about the most recent review. The groups have always been able to produce the reports, but they aren't political and because it is cross-sector they don't often times have the ability to step in to an advocacy role. That said, if you read the reports and recommendations you can see that the under-funding of the UPSFF goes back a long time.

Again, none of this should surprise the Council. They hear about it each year...I can find multiple people that testified about this each year. The simple truth from the comprehensive review is that the UPSFF is not enough to deliver adequate instruction to the kids in our schools. It's always "we have to make choices" and "can only spend so much" but that seems penny wise and pound foolish.

Families need to show up, shout out, and demand more investments to ensure our kids have what they need. Like ALL kids. I don't think Deal or Wilson have enough and I certainly know that means nearly every other school doesn't either.

DC Council responds to parent pressure. Send them a note- it is budget season. Tell them we have to invest more in schools- not @*&! sound-byte legislation, but actually funding schools so teachers have what they need to TEACH KIDS. It needs to go through the UPSFF and schools need to have the vast majority of funds directed to classroom instruction.

Send your CM a message and tell them that no matter what the Mayor's budget is for next year- it needs to FULLY FUND THE RECOMMENDED UPSFF levels.

PP here- the link is

https://osse.dc.gov/page/2022-23-uniform-student-funding-formula-upsff-working-group

Thank you! I will send an email and read the report.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I too think teachers should have more flexibility and we need additional people who are trained in delivering student education or offering a safe space at school so that is possible for students.

Unfortunately, the current UPSFF formula is based on a certain model and finding the funding to have more people in a building to not only cover, but enrich the student experience is going to require the UPSFF to be appropriately funded.

ICYMI there have been advocates that testify to this every year during the budget season. The UPSFF advisory group says "it takes x amount of money to do all the things that have to happen to adequately support students. The recommendations have not been followed for more than a decade.

So, when I see DC Council step up with a bill like this, it makes me want to scream in their faces...WHERE HAVE YOU BEEN?

It is so sad to see this board and our communities divide on this topic. We need more staffing and support in our schools and we need to PAY FOR IT.

I realize people think DCPS central office is bloated and DC Charter school salaries are too high...blah, blah, blah. That is all just noise.

An independent group of experts told DC council and executive to fund at one level and they never have. Let's put the blame where it belongs, not with parents or teachers who want more.

This makes a lot of sense. Who makes up the UPSFF advisory group? What part of government is it in? How do we support them or advocate for them?

The review happens only every few years. Here is a link to the DME materials about the most recent review. The groups have always been able to produce the reports, but they aren't political and because it is cross-sector they don't often times have the ability to step in to an advocacy role. That said, if you read the reports and recommendations you can see that the under-funding of the UPSFF goes back a long time.

Again, none of this should surprise the Council. They hear about it each year...I can find multiple people that testified about this each year. The simple truth from the comprehensive review is that the UPSFF is not enough to deliver adequate instruction to the kids in our schools. It's always "we have to make choices" and "can only spend so much" but that seems penny wise and pound foolish.

Families need to show up, shout out, and demand more investments to ensure our kids have what they need. Like ALL kids. I don't think Deal or Wilson have enough and I certainly know that means nearly every other school doesn't either.

DC Council responds to parent pressure. Send them a note- it is budget season. Tell them we have to invest more in schools- not @*&! sound-byte legislation, but actually funding schools so teachers have what they need to TEACH KIDS. It needs to go through the UPSFF and schools need to have the vast majority of funds directed to classroom instruction.

Send your CM a message and tell them that no matter what the Mayor's budget is for next year- it needs to FULLY FUND THE RECOMMENDED UPSFF levels.

PP here- the link is

https://osse.dc.gov/page/2022-23-uniform-student-funding-formula-upsff-working-group

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I too think teachers should have more flexibility and we need additional people who are trained in delivering student education or offering a safe space at school so that is possible for students.

Unfortunately, the current UPSFF formula is based on a certain model and finding the funding to have more people in a building to not only cover, but enrich the student experience is going to require the UPSFF to be appropriately funded.

ICYMI there have been advocates that testify to this every year during the budget season. The UPSFF advisory group says "it takes x amount of money to do all the things that have to happen to adequately support students. The recommendations have not been followed for more than a decade.

So, when I see DC Council step up with a bill like this, it makes me want to scream in their faces...WHERE HAVE YOU BEEN?

It is so sad to see this board and our communities divide on this topic. We need more staffing and support in our schools and we need to PAY FOR IT.

I realize people think DCPS central office is bloated and DC Charter school salaries are too high...blah, blah, blah. That is all just noise.

An independent group of experts told DC council and executive to fund at one level and they never have. Let's put the blame where it belongs, not with parents or teachers who want more.

This makes a lot of sense. Who makes up the UPSFF advisory group? What part of government is it in? How do we support them or advocate for them?

The review happens only every few years. Here is a link to the DME materials about the most recent review. The groups have always been able to produce the reports, but they aren't political and because it is cross-sector they don't often times have the ability to step in to an advocacy role. That said, if you read the reports and recommendations you can see that the under-funding of the UPSFF goes back a long time.

Again, none of this should surprise the Council. They hear about it each year...I can find multiple people that testified about this each year. The simple truth from the comprehensive review is that the UPSFF is not enough to deliver adequate instruction to the kids in our schools. It's always "we have to make choices" and "can only spend so much" but that seems penny wise and pound foolish.

Families need to show up, shout out, and demand more investments to ensure our kids have what they need. Like ALL kids. I don't think Deal or Wilson have enough and I certainly know that means nearly every other school doesn't either.

DC Council responds to parent pressure. Send them a note- it is budget season. Tell them we have to invest more in schools- not @*&! sound-byte legislation, but actually funding schools so teachers have what they need to TEACH KIDS. It needs to go through the UPSFF and schools need to have the vast majority of funds directed to classroom instruction.

Send your CM a message and tell them that no matter what the Mayor's budget is for next year- it needs to FULLY FUND THE RECOMMENDED UPSFF levels.

Anonymous wrote:I too think teachers should have more flexibility and we need additional people who are trained in delivering student education or offering a safe space at school so that is possible for students.

Unfortunately, the current UPSFF formula is based on a certain model and finding the funding to have more people in a building to not only cover, but enrich the student experience is going to require the UPSFF to be appropriately funded.

ICYMI there have been advocates that testify to this every year during the budget season. The UPSFF advisory group says "it takes x amount of money to do all the things that have to happen to adequately support students. The recommendations have not been followed for more than a decade.

So, when I see DC Council step up with a bill like this, it makes me want to scream in their faces...WHERE HAVE YOU BEEN?

It is so sad to see this board and our communities divide on this topic. We need more staffing and support in our schools and we need to PAY FOR IT.

I realize people think DCPS central office is bloated and DC Charter school salaries are too high...blah, blah, blah. That is all just noise.

An independent group of experts told DC council and executive to fund at one level and they never have. Let's put the blame where it belongs, not with parents or teachers who want more.

This makes a lot of sense. Who makes up the UPSFF advisory group? What part of government is it in? How do we support them or advocate for them?