Interesting Times in Wisconsin..........

[FinanceDude]

Do you actually know for a fact that all the Wis layoffs spoken of by the governor would have been 100% teachers? I read the layoffs would have involved some state employees as well.

Not just teachers would be laid off, other employees too, but the teacher's unions make it sound like it will be 100% teachers.........

It works differently here in Illinois. Our highest paid public sector employees such as school superintendents, high level state employees such as the govenors staff, etc. are not protected. Interesting that those folks would be union members in Wis. Which union?{/quote]

Not sure, but Gov Walker reminded everyone HE is a state employee too, so HE is giving up collective bargaining............

Wow! So you know who's on the layoff lists? It's a little surprising that the senators would be married to low seniority teachers since they're not young kids themselves, but ya never know.

The school districts already were given warning on the loss of state aid. The communities where these Republican senators come from are fiscally conervative areas. Both senator's wives are not 20 year+ employees, one went back to work after raising kids, not sure about the other......

 

[FinanceDude]

That was a very irritating aspect of the "stimulus" marketing. It was sold as an investment in infrastructure that would improve US productivity well into the future. There are federal/local expenditures that would meet that definition. But that's not what the money has largely been spent on--it has generally been spent on the daily operations in states, counties, and municipalities. Just preserving public sector jobs. I guess it's possible all those school guidance counselors and social workers were put to work paving roads and reinforcing bridges, but I doubt it.

Well, SOMETHING was being shoveled...........

 

[youbet]

Not sure, but Gov Walker reminded everyone HE is a state employee too, so HE is giving up collective bargaining............

Not trying to be nit-picky here FD, I know you're kinda emotionally fired up on all of this, but the govenor never had collective bargaining rights. If he said he has collective bargaining rights that are being diminished by this legislation, I think we have a credibility issue with him.

But maybe I'm wrong. Maybe he pays dues to one of the state employee unions, carries his union card, votes in union elections, etc. I just don't think so.........

 

[Midpack]

If they were prepared to lay off 1600 teachers (I've heard several numbers quoted), why would they replace these 7? What am I missing?

I am quoting myself so as not to pick out one of the responses above. If Wisconsin has a $3.6B deficit it's trying to deal with, why would you replace any teachers who leave? Do you think a business running at a huge loss would not take advantage of attrition to cut costs whenever they present themselves?

Before laying off anyone, or reducing anyone's wages & benefits, you first restructure your remaining workforce to reduce costs through natural attrition. It's the least painful way to reduce costs. This case is about an elementary school, so you eliminate 1 class at each grade level (1 thru 6 presumably) and increase class size on all the remaining classes. It's not ideal, but with those kind of deficits, you don't have to replace teachers you clearly can't pay for. I recently read that Detroit is going to 60 students per class, that's awful but you can't just maintain the status quo either.

 

[M Paquette]

Not sure, but Gov Walker reminded everyone HE is a state employee too, so HE is giving up collective bargaining............

Wow. Do you think he'll drop his membership in the Wisconsin Governor's Union Local #1? Might save on some dues that way...

 

[ERD50]

I am quoting myself so as not to pick out one of the responses above. If Wisconsin has a $3.6B deficit it's trying to deal with, why would you replace any teachers who leave? Do you think a business running at a huge loss would not take advantage of attrition to cut costs whenever they present themselves?

Before laying off anyone, or reducing anyone's wages & benefits, you first restructure your remaining workforce to reduce costs through natural attrition. It's the least painful way to reduce costs. This case is about an elementary school, so you eliminate 1 class at each grade level (1 thru 6 presumably) and increase class size on all the remaining classes. ...

Because the Union will sue you if you try it?

Teachers union sues CPS over increased class size

edit/add: businesses made all sort of decisions that would appear to be non-rational, but they did it because of the power of the unions. GM/UAW?

-ERD50

 

[samclem]

Because the Union will sue you if you try it?

Teachers union sues CPS over increased class size

And, despite the conventional wisdom, class size is only very poorly correlated with scholastic achievement.

Example: Hoxby OU thesis (there are many others)

 

[HFWR]

Because the Union will sue you if you try it?

Teachers union sues CPS over increased class size

-ERD50

And, despite the conventional wisdom, class size is only very poorly correlated with scholastic achievement.

Example: Hoxby OU thesis (there are many others)

I have two volunteers to teach classes of sixty elementary students.

 

[Westernskies]

Wow. Do you think he'll drop his membership in the Wisconsin Governor's Union Local #1? Might save on some dues that way...

Possibly, since his dues won't come out of his check anymore...

 

[Mulligan]

I have two volunteers to teach classes of sixty elementary students.

I hope you are joking. When I taught I had 60 or so a few times when I taught PE,and that was workable, but not great. But sixty in an elementary classroom (or high school)? That would be insane! I never was at a school that had classrooms that could hold even 45. While the research exists that class size isnt a strong correlation to learning, I bet this was compared to sizes of 15 versus 30, not SIXTY!

 

[ERD50]

I have two volunteers to teach classes of sixty elementary students.

I hope you are joking.

I wasn't sure what the point was, or what the " " was supposed to convey. I hesitate to respond, since I don't get the comment.

-ERD50

 

[Mulligan]

I wasn't sure what the point was, or what the " " was supposed to convey. I hesitate to respond, since I don't get the comment.

-ERD50

My only point was I would find it impossible to provide an adequate education to a class of elem. students that had 60 students in the classroom.

 

[ziggy29]

My only point was I would find it impossible to provide an adequate education to a class of elem. students that had 60 students in the classroom.

Probably so, but what's the "magic number" here? When I was in elementary school (1970-77), we usually averaged around 30 pupils, sometimes as low as around 25 or 26 and sometimes as high as about 33-34. A lot of focus today is on keeping class sizes in the low 20s. We need to pay 50% more teachers in the classroom with 20 students per room than with 30 per room. I'm not convinced that's made education that much better in terms of student outcomes, though it's certainly less homework to grade and fewer parents to deal with. I'd have to think there are better ways to spend the amount of money it takes to hire 50% more teachers than to reduce class sizes by a third.

 

[ERD50]

My only point was I would find it impossible to provide an adequate education to a class of elem. students that had 60 students in the classroom.

I understand that - I'm just not sure where/why HFWR pulled that 60 number from. Or what me and/or samclem teaching has to do with it. Again, maybe the " " thing conveyed something I didn't follow.

-ERD50

 

[Mulligan]

Probably so, but what's the "magic number" here? When I was in elementary school (1970-77), we usually averaged around 30 pupils, sometimes as low as around 25 or 26 and sometimes as high as about 33-34. A lot of focus today is on keeping class sizes in the low 20s. We need to pay 50% more teachers in the classroom with 20 students per room than with 30 per room. I'm not convinced that's made education better in terms of student outcomes, though it's certainly less homework to grade and fewer parents to deal with.

Me personally, I think the magic number varies. For example, with well motivated, well behaved students you can teach 40 students in an honors class pretty easy. Trying to do that with first graders would be very tough. I remember being in classes with 32 or so in junior high when I was a student. But the threat of a good paddling kept us in line. As far as speaking in generalities I believe those class sizes of 15-20 are not efficient use of tax dollars.
Most teachers are good hard wokers, but occassionally I would get some crying cause they might have 28-30 in a class a few hours. When they complained to me I just said "Did you know teachers in Las Vegas have 35-40. Would you rather have that?" They'd leave me alone after that.

 

[HFWR]

I understand that - I'm just not sure where/why HFWR pulled that 60 number from. Or what me and/or samclem teaching has to do with it. Again, maybe the " " thing conveyed something I didn't follow.

-ERD50

Well, at least one member (besides me) saw some humor in that. Lots of talk of overpaid, obstinate teachers/unions, and classroom size not correlated with achievement, so I thought that sounded so good that you guys might want to volunteer for a super-sized, market-determined salaried, teaching position...

Just tugging your leash. No reason to get thongs in a bunch.

 

[haha]

I hope you are joking. When I taught I had 60 or so a few times when I taught PE,and that was workable, but not great. But sixty in an elementary classroom (or high school)? That would be insane! I never was at a school that had classrooms that could hold even 45. While the research exists that class size isnt a strong correlation to learning, I bet this was compared to sizes of 15 versus 30, not SIXTY!

I got all the way through grade school never seeing a class smaller than about 55. My first grade class was 70. Nevertheless not long ago I went to a reunion, and close to everyone had done very well in life, most as old line professionals- lawyers, a judge, several doctors, etc.

Mostly we didn't spend any time on soft things. We learned to read, write, spell, do arithmetic, be loyal to our friends, and try to stay out of trouble. Because trouble was always doubled or more.

Ha

 

[Mulligan]

I got all the way through grade school never seeing a class smaller than about 55. My first grade class was 70. Nevertheless not long ago I went to a reunion, and close to everyone had done very well in life, most as old line professionals- lawyers, a judge, several doctors, etc.

Mostly we didn't spend any time on soft things. We learned to read, write, spell, do arithmetic, be loyal to our friends, and try to stay out of trouble. Because trouble was always doubled or more.

Ha

My land! How big was the classroom? I taught at 7 different schools and been in many more, and I dont know if I have ever seen a classroom (outside of gym and band room) that could hold that many bodies in it. I guess you could get a reasonable amount of learning done in a class of 60 with the teacher teaching, and a teachers aide walking around with a "Board of Education" monitoring student attentiveness

 

[samclem]

Reducing class size is just one way to use available resources, and I'm not sure it is the best way to go.

If we can evaluate teachers effectively and keep/promote the best ones, then it will be important to compensate them well. I'd bet that we'd get better results paying two top-notch teachers $90K each (incl benefits) and having them teach classes of 30 kids each than leaving the present system in place and paying three "meets-standards-and-have-seniority" teachers $60K to teach classes of 20 kids each.

 

[Mulligan]

Reducing class size is just one way to use available resources, and I'm not sure it is the best way to go.

If we can evaluate teachers effectively and keep/promote the best ones, then it will be important to compensate them well. I'd bet that we'd get better results paying two top-notch teachers $90K each (incl benefits) and having them teach classes of 30 kids each than leaving the present system in place and paying three "meets-standards-and-have-seniority" teachers $60K to teach classes of 20 kids each.

I find no fault in your reasoning, Samclem. As a parent I would much rather have my student in the larger class with an excellent teacher, than a small class with a mediocre teacher.

 

[haha]

My land! How big was the classroom? I taught at 7 different schools and been in many more, and I dont know if I have ever seen a classroom (outside of gym and band room) that could hold that many bodies in it. I guess you could get a reasonable amount of learning done in a class of 60 with the teacher teaching, and a teachers aide walking around with a "Board of Education" monitoring student attentiveness

Nah; just one old nun with a huge stick who was motivated by the love of God and an abiding distaste for human males. As to how big the room was, it looked pretty small to my adult eyes. Anyway, it worked. When any of us went to public high schools with much smaller classes, we generally left the incumbents in the dirt. If you get hit when you make a mistake, you try just a little harder.

I have a story from that first grade class that has been a lifelong lesson for me. We had some Dick and Jane reader. Jane carried a teddy Bear. They were looking at an excavation site where a big power shovel was working, and Jane dropped her Teddy Bear into the pit. We were all concerned about it, so the teacher asked, "Can the shovel see Teddy?"One after another we answered, yes, it is right there in the clear, it sees it. Finally she got around to some farm kid who had always seemed pretty slow in our hypercompetitive world. I think his name was Martin. So she says, Martin, does the shovel see the Teddy Bear? Martin confidently said "No, it can't see anything, it doesn't have eyes!" His tone implied that we must have all been crazy not to realize this basic fact of nature.

So after that I tried to pay closer attention to everything in the field, instead of jumping at conclusions in my overeagerness to get the answer first.

Martin was pretty much my first grade hero.

Ha

 

[rescueme]

Nah; just one old nun with a huge stick who was motivated by the love of God and an abiding distaste for human males.

Same here. 58 in our grade during the mid-50's in elementary school. I believe that the nuns we had could probably cover twice that amount, if the room would have been big enough (desks were pushed together - no isles except on one side of the room)...

 

[Mulligan]

Nah; just one old nun with a huge stick who was motivated by the love of God and an abiding distaste for human males. As to how big the room was, it looked pretty small to my adult eyes. Anyway, it worked. When any of us went to public high schools with much smaller classes, we generally left the incumbents in the dirt. If you get hit when you make a mistake, you try just a little harder.

I have a story from that first grade class that has been a lifelong lesson for me. We had some Dick and Jane reader. Jane carried a teddy Bear. They were looking at an excavation site where a big power shovel was working, and Jane dropped her Teddy Bear into the pit. We were all concerned about it, so the teacher asked, "Can the shovel see Teddy?"One after another we answered, yes, it is right there in the clear, it sees it. Finally she got around to some farm kid who had always seemed pretty slow in our hypercompetitive world. I think his name was Martin. So she says, Martin, does the shovel see the Teddy Bear? Martin confidently said "No, it can't see anything, it doesn't have eyes!" His tone implied that we must have all been crazy not to realize this basic fact of nature.

So after that I tried to pay closer attention to everything in the field, instead of jumping at conclusions in my overeagerness to get the answer first.

Martin was pretty much my first grade hero.

Ha

Good stuff! I enjoyed reading it!

 

[rescueme]

Good stuff! I enjoyed reading it!

If you want to read about the "antics" in a 50's classroom run by nuns, you could read "A Bold Fresh Piece of Humanity" by Bill O'Reilly. It contains several stores about those days, and those (non-union ) teachers...

 

[Bestwifeever]

Also a Catholic school alum for grades 1 through 5--all classes had 60 kids in them, you could hear a pin drop at any moment, and I don't remember any nun ever having to discipline anyone. Started sixth grad in a public school in fall of 1961 when we moved, maybe 30 kids, bored out of my skull.

But times change.