So, school strike season is upon those in the US (which is ironic being that in many areas it is actually illegal for teachers to strike). That means i get to do what would be considered an "anti-teacher" post. This applies mainly to the US system. Maybe some of the other countries out do things better.
Striking against an organization (like a school district) that has minimal control over its funding (and tight budgets) is a little counterproductive anyway.
1) Education: a comingling of unions with government. i'm not saying that the government is a completely irresponsible entity that turns everything it touches into crap. Well, maybe i am a little. In the past, the eduacational system seemed to work well enough for the US economy's needs. However, a lot has changed since then - the school system, not so much.
What is the incentive for schools to change and succeed? Really, there is none. Schools get their funding regardless of how badly they spend it.
Unions and government - basically liberals bargaining with themselves. This can not end well for the taxpayer. This is a situation that will lead to overpaid teachers and misallocated funds. What i am insinuating here is that teachers get largely "sweetheart" deals. During the Obamacare "debate" they had to try and exclude teachers from the "cadillac health care plans". With the amount of work the teachers actually do, they should be receiving much less. They "work" maybe 184 days a year, the average for other full time workers is from 240 days to 260 days - depending on vacations an holidays.
i support the concept of vouchers for schools (no more public schools). The only way schools actually have an incentive to improve is if there is money on the line. Competition could provide better schools (or at least allocate resources more efficiently). Sure, you still would have "low rent" schools.
2) Education is a service industry:
This is kind of a hard concept for teachers to grasp. Yes, teachers are service "professionals" - like doctors, lawyers, accountants, etc (but much lower skilled). What they really don't understand is that service industries succeed due to volume. The more clients they serve, the better they tend to do. Teachers take the opposite view - they want more money for less work (smaller class sizes). Have smaller class sizes ever actually been proven to be an advantage?
Bottom line teachers: if you want smaller class sizes - take a pay/benefits cut. If you want to keep your current level of income - work more days for the same amount.
There is no way the system can possibly change for the better as long as there are obstructionist labor unions blocking progress.
3) Equality:
This is a counterproductive concept that the governement tries to push down everyone's throat. No, all students are not equal. Not all students can succeed. There are some people (through disability or other aspects) who are not educatable - and money should not be wasted on them. One of the biggest flaws is that the system tries to serve everyone (whether they can be served or not) and spends too much money on lost causes.
4) The US is too letigious
What point is there to suing a public school district? Maybe for some serious issues it makes sense. Like most of US culture this has been abused. However, it may make certain sense - but it is basically a taxpayer suing other taxpayers, with the loss coming from the district's budget. This lowers the district's budget - so in that way it is counterproductive.
The lawsuits i find most egregious are the "civil rights" lawsuits. Why should a district have to pay (potentially) millions because a lesbian can't take her girlfriend to prom? Paying someone for hurt feelings is stupid. Never mind that a student could probably try and sue for bad grades (alleging bias). The courts should have stayed out of these issues (and let the schools decide on their own).
No comments:
Post a Comment