NC has fewer teachers and more students

[bannination]

http://www.blueridgenow.com/article/201 ... ?p=1&tc=pg

Boy, NC just can't get it's crap together with all these wingnuts running around.

[Mr.B]

"Boy, NC just can't get it's crap together with all these wingnuts running around."

Let's change the wording to that just slightly.........
"Boy, NC just can't get it's crap together with all the Hispanic students that are overwhelming the school systems......"

This is not to imply any prejudice, it is to imply that NC is dragging it's butt in preparing for the influx.

"Salaries for North Carolina teachers are among the lowest in the country...."
less and less graduating students are interested in a teaching career.

[Boatrocker]

Got any citation for that anal extraction?

[O Really]

It doesn't really matter who the students are, where they come from, or what their ethnicity is. The fools in charge aren't dealing with it well, unless their goal is to intentionally make public education so awful that they can say, "look, more 'failed schools' - no more money for you sorry teachers." Oh, wait.

[bannination]

"Boy, NC just can't get it's crap together with all these wingnuts running around."

Let's change the wording to that just slightly.........
"Boy, NC just can't get it's crap together with all the Hispanic students that are overwhelming the school systems......"

This is not to imply any prejudice, it is to imply that NC is dragging it's butt in preparing for the influx.

"Salaries for North Carolina teachers are among the lowest in the country...."
less and less graduating students are interested in a teaching career.

Yep, why teach when you can make so much more doing something else. They work crazy hours for little pay considering the educational requirements.
Of course, that's my opinion.

At least it isn't hard labor though.

[neoplacebo]

Or the Colonel could have been right about all those upper middle class Mexican farmers he used to talk about....they've obviously opted out of the public education system and attend private schools, which skews the figures even more extremely. We'll wait. Just sayin'.....

[Mr.B]

"Got any citation for that anal extraction?"

Do you have anything to refute your anal explosion?

[Mr.B]

"Many of those Hispanic students are citizens and almost all of their parents work to improve the lives of white Americans, often for submarket wages."

I agree wholeheartedly.....my point above was that back when NC first started receiving an influx of Hispanic children, they didn't bother to plan ahead in anticipation that a day would come when there would not be enough teachers vs. the number of students. Instead, teacher salaries are
being held at minimum standards, despite the start-up of an "Education Lottery" which the public was duped into believing that monies would be used to improve education. Lottery money is going to the schools, but into the wrong pockets.

[O Really]

"Many of those Hispanic students are citizens and almost all of their parents work to improve the lives of white Americans, often for submarket wages."

I agree wholeheartedly.....my point above was that back when NC first started receiving an influx of Hispanic children, they didn't bother to plan ahead in anticipation that a day would come when there would not be enough teachers vs. the number of students. Instead, teacher salaries are
being held at minimum standards, despite the start-up of an "Education Lottery" which the public was duped into believing that monies would be used to improve education. Lottery money is going to the schools, but into the wrong pockets.

Partially true, Mr.B, but remember that as recently as 2008, NC teachers' salary was mid-pack nationally. Now it's bottom. As to the lottery, I don't know why anybody is surprised that lottery money is offset by reductions from the general fund. Same thing happened in most other states for years before NC had a lottery. Floggings are overdue.

[Roland Deschain]

"Many of those Hispanic students are citizens and almost all of their parents work to improve the lives of white Americans, often for submarket wages."

I agree wholeheartedly.....my point above was that back when NC first started receiving an influx of Hispanic children, they didn't bother to plan ahead in anticipation that a day would come when there would not be enough teachers vs. the number of students. Instead, teacher salaries are
being held at minimum standards, despite the start-up of an "Education Lottery" which the public was duped into believing that monies would be used to improve education. Lottery money is going to the schools, but into the wrong pockets.

Partially true, Mr.B, but remember that as recently as 2008, NC teachers' salary was mid-pack nationally. Now it's bottom. As to the lottery, I don't know why anybody is surprised that lottery money is offset by reductions from the general fund. Same thing happened in most other states for years before NC had a lottery. Floggings are overdue.

Agreed....everyone talks about the "education cuts" and they always start cutting at the bottom. The cuts need to start at administration level and work down.

[Roland Deschain]

Agreed....everyone talks about the "education cuts" and they always start cutting at the bottom. The cuts need to start at administration level and work down.

Is that also true at your government job, say with the administrators (if you're not one) that let you blog from work?

My job as an equitable pay scale with equal percentage raises as you move up the ladder. Not at all like the 6 figure school system supers who are well above rank and file.

[Roland Deschain]

Fair enough, but you're probably not managing hundreds of staff and thousands of students. What does your top boss make? I don't have an opinion on where cuts should be made. I support fewer tax breaks for corporations and fat cats, no subsidies for religious schools, not wasting money on school cops, and greater investment in public education.

So you think we should just throw more tax payer money at the system and let it fall where it may....and at this point, that is into the pockets of the top administrators at state and local level. Yeah, that makes sense

[O Really]

There is a lot of unnecessary duplication in school systems, starting with just having too many separate semi-autonomous systems, each needing its own administrative staff. You've got county systems, city systems, too many physical campuses, inefficient use of transport, not to mention as someone wrote in the A-CT, "a typewriter mentality in an Ipad world." But one thing that is pretty well undisputed in any industry is that you won't get or keep the best quality employees by paying the lowest rates. To get and keep the best, you have to offer something - it doesn't have to be all cash, but something valuable. Like job stability. Opps. Like a good retirement. Opps. Like being rewarded for professional improvement. Opps. Like working in a creative, supportive environment. Opps. Like having the support and appreciation of those in charge. Opps. If the idiot legislators had set out to design a package guaranteed to get rid of the best, keep the dregs, increase turnover, make recruiting difficult and the end deliverables shoddy, they couldn't have done it better. Oh wait. They did intend that, didn't they?

[Roland Deschain]

So you think we should just throw more tax payer money at the system and let it fall where it may....and at this point, that is into the pockets of the top administrators at state and local level. Yeah, that makes sense

Damn, you sure are illiterate, boy, which is really funny in an education thread. I posted nothing about where any theoretical new monies should go, nothing. I support teachers and whatever level of administration is needed so they can do their jobs, along with administrators paid enough that we attract quality ones, as O Really says. If that can all be accomplished with administration cuts, fine with me.

I see that you've now ducked twice stating what the "top administrators" make at your socialist workplace that we're throwing "tax payer (sic) money" at. Run away, Roland Deschain, run away.

I know that you did not post a preference on where money should go, which is why I said let the money "fall where it may". Is that not your position? The facts at this point show that most increases in funding wind up in the pockets of administrators. So, if you don't have an opinion where the cuts should be made:

I don't have an opinion on where cuts should be made.

Then you are either ignoring the current trend or support pushing more money into the pocket of administrators. Which is it....or has your twisting finally caused you to step on your dick?

[bannination]

Fair enough, but you're probably not managing hundreds of staff and thousands of students. What does your top boss make? I don't have an opinion on where cuts should be made. I support fewer tax breaks for corporations and fat cats, no subsidies for religious schools, not wasting money on school cops, and greater investment in public education.

So you think we should just throw more tax payer money at the system and let it fall where it may....and at this point, that is into the pockets of the top administrators at state and local level. Yeah, that makes sense

So you're saying we shouldn't run the government like a business..... hm......?????

[Roland Deschain]

So you're saying we shouldn't run the government like a business..... hm......?????

Last time I checked, a business needs to turn a profit to stay in business....didn't know a government operated that way. Nice try though

[bannination]

So you're saying we shouldn't run the government like a business..... hm......?????

Last time I checked, a business needs to turn a profit to stay in business....didn't know a government operated that way. Nice try though

That's my point, how are you going to retain or attract talent if you pay below market wages?

[Roland Deschain]

So you're saying we shouldn't run the government like a business..... hm......?????

Last time I checked, a business needs to turn a profit to stay in business....didn't know a government operated that way. Nice try though

That's my point, how are you going to retain or attract talent if you pay below market wages?

Agree...that is why I said we need to make cuts at the top and allow for more money to actually make it to the teachers.

[O Really]

Agree...that is why I said we need to make cuts at the top and allow for more money to actually make it to the teachers.

The salary of a superintendent is way above teachers and principals, but I don't know that principals are particularly overpaid. In any case, I don't think there's enough money in superintendent pay to make much of a difference in teacher pay. A big part of the problem is that a lot of people take the wrong path in starting with "cuts" instead of starting with looking for places to save or reduce costs. There are many things that should and could happen to reduce costs before taking it out of the teachers' hides. That might include less administration, but that wouldn't be all. For example, I don't know how much a school system spends on textbooks, but I'd bet they'd spend a lot less if they issued more electronically. Like these people... http://thejournal.com/pages/cdwg/21st-c ... books.aspx

So a rational approach would be to do a comprehensive analysis of where the money goes, rather than just quoting a "per student" total, or an "average teacher" figure and start with saying we're going to look for savings, and we're going to look last - not first - at teacher pay. Hold on, did I say "rational"? And I would expect that out of the current legislature why?

[Roland Deschain]

Damn, you sure are illiterate, boy, which is really funny in an education thread. I posted nothing about where any theoretical new monies should go, nothing. I support teachers and whatever level of administration is needed so they can do their jobs, along with administrators paid enough that we attract quality ones, as O Really says. If that can all be accomplished with administration cuts, fine with me.

I see that you've now ducked twice stating what the "top administrators" make at your socialist workplace that we're throwing "tax payer (sic) money" at. Run away, Roland Deschain, run away.

I know that you did not post a preference on where money should go, which is why I said let the money "fall where it may". Is that not your position?

Damn, you remain illiterate. It's funny how you play a dumb movie in your head and can't shake it no matter how it's refuted.

The facts at this point show that most increases in funding wind up in the pockets of administrators.

As always with your "facts", citation needed.

So, if you don't have an opinion where the cuts should be made:

I don't have an opinion on where cuts should be made.

Then you are either ignoring the current trend or support pushing more money into the pocket of administrators. Which is it....or has your twisting finally caused you to step on your dick?

Oh, I see, you've made a fool of yourself, again, by not comprehending the entire post and deleting the parts that are so confusing to you. Here, I'll help you out, as usual:

...I support fewer tax breaks for corporations and fat cats, no subsidies for religious schools, not wasting money on school cops, and greater investment in public education.

I oppose the GOP's education cuts.[/color]
It's no surprise that my subsequent support for teachers and my acceptance of administration cuts if it doesn't harm teaching went sailing over your head. Again, it's really funny in an education thread.

It's also no surprise that for the 3rd time you remain too dickless to tell us what the "top administrators" make at your socialist workplace that we're throwing "tax payer (sic) money" at. Run away, Roland Deschain, run away.

Keep spinning. You made your position clear...

I don't have an opinion on where cuts should be made.

You were called on it, got egg on your face, and are now trying to spin out of it. Fine, keep spinning, I don't give a rip, but your position is clearly posted for all to see.