Anonymous wrote:You're pitiful and a perfect example of ignorance. I love how so many "educated" posters can chime in as experts in education.

Unless teachers bring problems to the forefront, these problems will only grow larger. But so many elitists on this site don't give a rat's ass about kids in low performing schools.

Again, it's only a matter of time before schools collapse, as this is a domino effect. You'll see. So save up for private school, sweetie, and say fuck you to retirement!

Since when did it become pitiful to address educational concerns, btw? So if you have a tumor, do you ignore it and allow it to grow?

moron

so sad

I am very concerned about educational standards and teachers being held to unfair expectations that cannot negate the social problems of our society. But I consider this strike to be immoral and unethical. A group that effectively crosses their arms and pouts and refuses to work on issues refuses to be part of the solution.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/chicago-teachers-strike-the-latest-fight-about-judging-teachers-by-their-students-performance/2012/09/13/03115b10-fd72-11e1-98c6-ec0a0a93f8eb_story.html

Apparently they are coming around based on the outrageous conditions of:

*a year of phase in before firings occur based on the new evaluation process
*some changes to the review categories
*addition of an appeals process

Not exactly the battle of tenure vs. performance that the posters on this site described. It sounds like pretty reasonable stuff.

What I don't get is if it was this simple, why did they strike? it's unexplainable. These issues could have been worked out without striking and punishing the kids. So much for putting the kids first.

No, these issues CANNOT be worked out w/o striking,

Until the public feels the pain, no one notices what exactly goes on inside a classroom. So when your DAYCARE is gone and you need to lose a few days of work, then you'll feel it.

Walk into a low performing school, view the 40+ faces, look at the deteriorating building, examine the "resources" provided by the system, and THEN tell me you think these teachers have it easy.

Remember that teachers pay their own salary. And when they're making shit for pay, working in unbearable conditions, being forced to take on societal problems of hunger and abuse and neglect, all white teaching 2+2, do you STILL think they don't deserve to strike?

Live in your bubble, PP, b/c eventually these conditions will be hitting the DC-metro area soon enough, as many DC schools are a reflection of Chicago schools. And as poverty spreads and as unemployment rises, you'll soon see the elite heading off to privates while the middle class and poor suffer through some miserable conditions are their local schools.

It's only a matter of time . . .

I will live in my bubble where it is illegal for municipals workers, this includes teachers, to strike. Chicago needs to pass a law to make it illegals for the teachers to strike. They should all be ashamed of themselves. And fired. Pitiful.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They weren't worked out which is why they had to strike. Have you ever taught a class of 44 8 year olds? I didn't think so. . .

Not quite...

Student/teacher ratio
20.0 pupils per teacher in elementary schools
24.6 pupils per teacher in high school

http://www.cps.edu/about_cps/at-a-glance/pages/stats_and_facts.aspx

and?

How many are illiterate? How many can't speak English? How many NEVER come to school, and when they do, who's there to catch them up from A to Z b/c they've missed so much?

Such morons on this site! There are no intelligent posters, as most are talking out of their asses. You're an ass, btw.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/chicago-teachers-strike-the-latest-fight-about-judging-teachers-by-their-students-performance/2012/09/13/03115b10-fd72-11e1-98c6-ec0a0a93f8eb_story.html

Apparently they are coming around based on the outrageous conditions of:

*a year of phase in before firings occur based on the new evaluation process
*some changes to the review categories
*addition of an appeals process

Not exactly the battle of tenure vs. performance that the posters on this site described. It sounds like pretty reasonable stuff.

What I don't get is if it was this simple, why did they strike? it's unexplainable. These issues could have been worked out without striking and punishing the kids. So much for putting the kids first.

No, these issues CANNOT be worked out w/o striking,

Until the public feels the pain, no one notices what exactly goes on inside a classroom. So when your DAYCARE is gone and you need to lose a few days of work, then you'll feel it.

Walk into a low performing school, view the 40+ faces, look at the deteriorating building, examine the "resources" provided by the system, and THEN tell me you think these teachers have it easy.

Remember that teachers pay their own salary. And when they're making shit for pay, working in unbearable conditions, being forced to take on societal problems of hunger and abuse and neglect, all white teaching 2+2, do you STILL think they don't deserve to strike?

Live in your bubble, PP, b/c eventually these conditions will be hitting the DC-metro area soon enough, as many DC schools are a reflection of Chicago schools. And as poverty spreads and as unemployment rises, you'll soon see the elite heading off to privates while the middle class and poor suffer through some miserable conditions are their local schools.

It's only a matter of time . . .

I will live in my bubble where it is illegal for municipals workers, this includes teachers, to strike. Chicago needs to pass a law to make it illegals for the teachers to strike. They should all be ashamed of themselves. And fired. Pitiful.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They weren't worked out which is why they had to strike. Have you ever taught a class of 44 8 year olds? I didn't think so. . .

Not quite...

Student/teacher ratio
20.0 pupils per teacher in elementary schools
24.6 pupils per teacher in high school

http://www.cps.edu/about_cps/at-a-glance/pages/stats_and_facts.aspx

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They weren't worked out which is why they had to strike. Have you ever taught a class of 44 8 year olds? I didn't think so. . .

Not quite...

Student/teacher ratio
20.0 pupils per teacher in elementary schools
24.6 pupils per teacher in high school

http://www.cps.edu/about_cps/at-a-glance/pages/stats_and_facts.aspx

Anonymous wrote:They weren't worked out which is why they had to strike. Have you ever taught a class of 44 8 year olds? I didn't think so. . .

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/chicago-teachers-strike-the-latest-fight-about-judging-teachers-by-their-students-performance/2012/09/13/03115b10-fd72-11e1-98c6-ec0a0a93f8eb_story.html

Apparently they are coming around based on the outrageous conditions of:

*a year of phase in before firings occur based on the new evaluation process
*some changes to the review categories
*addition of an appeals process

Not exactly the battle of tenure vs. performance that the posters on this site described. It sounds like pretty reasonable stuff.

What I don't get is if it was this simple, why did they strike? it's unexplainable. These issues could have been worked out without striking and punishing the kids. So much for putting the kids first.

No, these issues CANNOT be worked out w/o striking,

Until the public feels the pain, no one notices what exactly goes on inside a classroom. So when your DAYCARE is gone and you need to lose a few days of work, then you'll feel it.

Walk into a low performing school, view the 40+ faces, look at the deteriorating building, examine the "resources" provided by the system, and THEN tell me you think these teachers have it easy.

Remember that teachers pay their own salary. And when they're making shit for pay, working in unbearable conditions, being forced to take on societal problems of hunger and abuse and neglect, all white teaching 2+2, do you STILL think they don't deserve to strike?

Live in your bubble, PP, b/c eventually these conditions will be hitting the DC-metro area soon enough, as many DC schools are a reflection of Chicago schools. And as poverty spreads and as unemployment rises, you'll soon see the elite heading off to privates while the middle class and poor suffer through some miserable conditions are their local schools.

It's only a matter of time . . .

I will live in my bubble where it is illegal for municipals workers, this includes teachers, to strike. Chicago needs to pass a law to make it illegals for the teachers to strike. They should all be ashamed of themselves. And fired. Pitiful.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/chicago-teachers-strike-the-latest-fight-about-judging-teachers-by-their-students-performance/2012/09/13/03115b10-fd72-11e1-98c6-ec0a0a93f8eb_story.html

Apparently they are coming around based on the outrageous conditions of:

*a year of phase in before firings occur based on the new evaluation process
*some changes to the review categories
*addition of an appeals process

Not exactly the battle of tenure vs. performance that the posters on this site described. It sounds like pretty reasonable stuff.

What I don't get is if it was this simple, why did they strike? it's unexplainable. These issues could have been worked out without striking and punishing the kids. So much for putting the kids first.

No, these issues CANNOT be worked out w/o striking,

Until the public feels the pain, no one notices what exactly goes on inside a classroom. So when your DAYCARE is gone and you need to lose a few days of work, then you'll feel it.

Walk into a low performing school, view the 40+ faces, look at the deteriorating building, examine the "resources" provided by the system, and THEN tell me you think these teachers have it easy.

Remember that teachers pay their own salary. And when they're making shit for pay, working in unbearable conditions, being forced to take on societal problems of hunger and abuse and neglect, all white teaching 2+2, do you STILL think they don't deserve to strike?

Live in your bubble, PP, b/c eventually these conditions will be hitting the DC-metro area soon enough, as many DC schools are a reflection of Chicago schools. And as poverty spreads and as unemployment rises, you'll soon see the elite heading off to privates while the middle class and poor suffer through some miserable conditions are their local schools.

It's only a matter of time . . .

I will live in my bubble where it is illegal for municipals workers, this includes teachers, to strike. Chicago needs to pass a law to make it illegals for the teachers to strike. They should all be ashamed of themselves. And fired. Pitiful.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/chicago-teachers-strike-the-latest-fight-about-judging-teachers-by-their-students-performance/2012/09/13/03115b10-fd72-11e1-98c6-ec0a0a93f8eb_story.html

Apparently they are coming around based on the outrageous conditions of:

*a year of phase in before firings occur based on the new evaluation process
*some changes to the review categories
*addition of an appeals process

Not exactly the battle of tenure vs. performance that the posters on this site described. It sounds like pretty reasonable stuff.

What I don't get is if it was this simple, why did they strike? it's unexplainable. These issues could have been worked out without striking and punishing the kids. So much for putting the kids first.

No, these issues CANNOT be worked out w/o striking,

Until the public feels the pain, no one notices what exactly goes on inside a classroom. So when your DAYCARE is gone and you need to lose a few days of work, then you'll feel it.

Walk into a low performing school, view the 40+ faces, look at the deteriorating building, examine the "resources" provided by the system, and THEN tell me you think these teachers have it easy.

Remember that teachers pay their own salary. And when they're making shit for pay, working in unbearable conditions, being forced to take on societal problems of hunger and abuse and neglect, all white teaching 2+2, do you STILL think they don't deserve to strike?

Live in your bubble, PP, b/c eventually these conditions will be hitting the DC-metro area soon enough, as many DC schools are a reflection of Chicago schools. And as poverty spreads and as unemployment rises, you'll soon see the elite heading off to privates while the middle class and poor suffer through some miserable conditions are their local schools.

It's only a matter of time . . .

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/chicago-teachers-strike-the-latest-fight-about-judging-teachers-by-their-students-performance/2012/09/13/03115b10-fd72-11e1-98c6-ec0a0a93f8eb_story.html

Apparently they are coming around based on the outrageous conditions of:

*a year of phase in before firings occur based on the new evaluation process
*some changes to the review categories
*addition of an appeals process

Not exactly the battle of tenure vs. performance that the posters on this site described. It sounds like pretty reasonable stuff.

What I don't get is if it was this simple, why did they strike? it's unexplainable. These issues could have been worked out without striking and punishing the kids. So much for putting the kids first.

No, these issues CANNOT be worked out w/o striking, hon.

Until the public feels the pain, no one notices what exactly goes on inside a classroom. So when your DAYCARE is gone and you need to lose a few days of work, then you'll feel it.

Walk into a low performing school, view the 40+ faces, look at the deteriorating building, examine the "resources" provided by the system, and THEN tell me you think these teachers have it easy.

Remember that teachers pay their own salary. And when they're making shit for pay, working in unbearable conditions, being forced to take on societal problems of hunger and abuse and neglect, all white teaching 2+2, do you STILL think they don't deserve to strike?

Live in your bubble, PP, b/c eventually these conditions will be hitting the DC-metro area soon enough, as many DC schools are a reflection of Chicago schools. And as poverty spreads and as unemployment rises, you'll soon see the elite heading off to privates while the middle class and poor suffer through some miserable conditions are their local schools.

It's only a matter of time . . .

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/chicago-teachers-strike-the-latest-fight-about-judging-teachers-by-their-students-performance/2012/09/13/03115b10-fd72-11e1-98c6-ec0a0a93f8eb_story.html

Apparently they are coming around based on the outrageous conditions of:

*a year of phase in before firings occur based on the new evaluation process
*some changes to the review categories
*addition of an appeals process

Not exactly the battle of tenure vs. performance that the posters on this site described. It sounds like pretty reasonable stuff.

What I don't get is if it was this simple, why did they strike? it's unexplainable. These issues could have been worked out without striking and punishing the kids. So much for putting the kids first.

No, these issues CANNOT be worked out w/o striking, hon.

Until the public feels the pain, no one notices what exactly goes on inside a classroom. So when your DAYCARE is gone and you need to lose a few days of work, then you'll feel it.

Walk into a low performing school, view the 40+ faces, look at the deteriorating building, examine the "resources" provided by the system, and THEN tell me you think these teachers have it easy.

Remember that teachers pay their own salary. And when they're making shit for pay, working in unbearable conditions, being forced to take on societal problems of hunger and abuse and neglect, all white teaching 2+2, do you STILL think they don't deserve to strike?

Live in your bubble, PP, b/c eventually these conditions will be hitting the DC-metro area soon enough, as many DC schools are a reflection of Chicago schools. And as poverty spreads and as unemployment rises, you'll soon see the elite heading off to privates while the middle class and poor suffer through some miserable conditions are their local schools.

It's only a matter of time . . .

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/chicago-teachers-strike-the-latest-fight-about-judging-teachers-by-their-students-performance/2012/09/13/03115b10-fd72-11e1-98c6-ec0a0a93f8eb_story.html

Apparently they are coming around based on the outrageous conditions of:

*a year of phase in before firings occur based on the new evaluation process
*some changes to the review categories
*addition of an appeals process

Not exactly the battle of tenure vs. performance that the posters on this site described. It sounds like pretty reasonable stuff.

What I don't get is if it was this simple, why did they strike? it's unexplainable. These issues could have been worked out without striking and punishing the kids. So much for putting the kids first.

Anonymous wrote:http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/chicago-teachers-strike-the-latest-fight-about-judging-teachers-by-their-students-performance/2012/09/13/03115b10-fd72-11e1-98c6-ec0a0a93f8eb_story.html

Apparently they are coming around based on the outrageous conditions of:

*a year of phase in before firings occur based on the new evaluation process
*some changes to the review categories
*addition of an appeals process

Not exactly the battle of tenure vs. performance that the posters on this site described. It sounds like pretty reasonable stuff.