The 2006-2009 teachers contract with District 150 specifies that teachers’ “hours of work” are “six (6) hours and thirty (30) minutes for primary and middle schools,” and six hours thirty-five minutes for high schools. By comparison, Pekin District 108 teachers’ work day includes the six and a half hours of the school day, plus thirty minutes before and twenty minutes after those hours, or about seven and a half hours. Dunlap schools have a similar requirement.
At Monday’s District 150 board meeting, union president Bob Darling spoke to the board during the “audience presentation” portion of the meeting, and among other things he defended the hours of work by saying, “I don’t know any teacher that only works six and a half hours.” The implication is that, even though they’re not contractually required to work longer, most teachers put in much more time than the minimum. I have no doubt that his assertion is true.
Nevertheless, because of the contractual limitation on hours, the school board only has six and a half hours to work with when scheduling the day. If they want to add teacher collaboration time to the day, they can’t tack it on before or after school, nor can they require teachers to use their prep periods (use of the prep period is also restricted in the contract). The board’s only options are not to add teacher collaboration time, or to take time away from the students. The latter is exactly what they did when they established so-called “wacky Wednesdays.”
I think critics have a point when they ask what other full-time job requires only six-and-a-half-hour days (32.5 hours per week), 180 days a year. I’ve never heard of it anywhere else. Full-time jobs usually require eight hours a day (40 hours per week). If teachers worked a standard full-time shift each day (or even seven and a half hours per day) with teacher collaboration time and a prep period(s) built in, then the district wouldn’t have to take time away from the students and the collaboration time would improve instructional quality, right? And since they’re already working those extra hours anyway, why would they object to making it part of their contractual work day, especially when it will greatly benefit the students and not obligate teachers to any more time than their peers in other districts?
How do principals get away with not supplying their employees with what they need for doing their jobs? How did it happen that teachers have to buy their own supplies?
Emerge: I’m not sure how it happened but the supplies we are given are very, very limited. I, also, bought all my own fans. I think in 43 years of teaching, the district may have supplied one or two fans–they don’t have that long a life. Also, I bought extra shelving, teacher’s chair. The list is endless. There again something is amiss–go into the offices on Wisconsin. I’d be willing to bet that their supplies are purchased by the district. Someone mentioned picking on Jim–if it had not be for Jim (and all of you can thank him) we would not be having this discussion. When he first brought it up at a board meeting, even Hinton told him that he would not approve of adding to a teacher’s day. Of course, Hinton was willing to lop off 45 minutes per day for students so that teachers could have common planning time–that was unacceptable to teachers. Common planning is the new educational “buzz” word–does any one of you understand exactly what that means? What would you expect teachers to do during this time every day? Most teachers walk into a classroom alone every day–there is little that requires common planning, especially at the high school level. The district already supplies curriculum guides that inform teachers what they should be teaching. If I am not mistaken, even the benchmarks are available for a teacher’s own group of students–the teacher probably doesn’t need to consult with anyone else to use the benchmarks to help instruct his/her students.
Oh Jon… you are just plain evil, aren’t you? Why didn’t include the rest of my quote???
“then teachers go home (if they are worth more than a nickle)… AND THEN…and evaluate their endeavors for the day, plan a new strategy for tomorrow and recover from the bureaucratic stress and disappointment of working for a system that cares not one wit about them or their students.
I would say a good teacher puts in about 12-16 hours a day doing their jobs.”
Whether they do that extra time at home or at school is irrelevant… but really nice try trying to create something out of your vivid imagination… a nation that far too many people are compatriots with you.
Oh, it was a joke… I get it.. ha ha
I understand that teaching at 150 is a very frustrating job. My sister works at one of the poorer 150 schools, and what she tells me is very similar to what the teachers post here. Except that when I suggest she go to a school district outside 150 or a parochial school, she tells me she won’t because she won’t make anything near what she makes at 150. She calls it combat pay. So it seems to me the 150 teachers are being compensated for what they have to put up with.
I think adding time into the school day makes sense. That is the trend at several local parochial schools.
I don’t hate teachers, not at all. But sometimes it seems to me they don’t realize that the rest of the working world also brings work home at night, works weekends, has continuing education requirements that the employee must pay for, and many of us where I work now bring in our own supplies. And the rest of the working world does this while expected to work a minimum of 40 hours a week. We get two weeks vacation a year, not three months off, and we do not get all the holiday breaks throughout the year. So when teachers compare their salary for 6.5 hour day for 9 months a year, I don’t really think its apples to apples.
desiderata… go placidly amidst the noise and haste and remember what peace there may be in silence…
what do teachers produce and what do “the rest of the working world” produce?
I guess all my friends must be teachers. What jobs or careers require all this overtime work at home? I’m sure lawyers, probably insurance agents–for instance, work odd hours. Enlighten me, please. I have worked in an office and I have worked retail–which is why I chose teaching. With all its problems, teaching was still a far more rewarding career–I’m not speaking of financial rewards; the pay alone would not have been enough of a reward.
It’s not just teachers having to make their own purchases. I received my kids’ school supply lists (grades 1 & 4), and they included the following:
30 oz bottle of hand sanitizer
1 ream copy paper
1 bottle hand soap
3 boxes tissues (on both lists)
1 canister antibacterial surface wipes (on both lists)
2 packs pencils and crayons (on both lists, but don’t put their names on them)
1 package dry erase markers (on both lists)
Expand these requests across 22-27 kids.
How many of D150 teachers know that boxtops4education.com offers classroom wishlists? Teachers (from schools which participate in box tops) can sign up, make a list of desired items for their classrooms from the businesses in the boxtops marketplace (e.g. OfficeDepot, OfficeMax, Staples, Oriental Trading, Barnes & Noble, etc.) Parents go to the lists, see what teachers need/want and can supply needs for the classrooms (a portion of the sales get credited to the school’s boxtops account).
Encourage your schools to take advantage of this program.
Sorry, kcdad, but you don’t get the point I was making. I didn’t include the rest of the quote because I, like CJ, concede that most teachers work far more than 40 hours a week. That isn’t the issue. The issue CJ questioned is why the MINIMUM is only 6 1/2 days at the school. Two months ago you seemed to say that teachers should be in the schools “until the doors are locked”. Now you are saying that where they are doesn’t matter. But, as far as I can see, you still haven’t addressed what the minimum should be.
I would rather have tenure taken away, as I believe you agree (at least two months ago you said that). Then this issue (how much time is spent at school, home, etc.) would be moot. If that won’t happen (I doubt it will), then I would like to see the bar raised a bit for the bare minimum.
I would like to point out that in my school, students were bringing little to no supplies to school. Who do you think supplies the pencils to the students when they come to school with none? Who supplies the paper, the glue, the notebooks, the crayons, etc.? It is a sad fact that across 150, hundreds of children will never bring a single supply into the classroom and will have no problem destroying, stealing, or wasting the supplies they get “free” from their teachers.
kcdad — well, placidly considering the occupations of some of my friends — one is a social worker who works with sexually abused children, several are nurses, one is a cook at a school, one is a GAL – a lawyer who represents abused children in child abuse court, and so on. What is your point? That only teachers “produce” something vital and worthwhile?
Sharon: I am pro-teacher in just about every instance, but do think that the argument that those other than teachers don’t bring work home is just plain silly. My husband is a planner. He works and researches at home. My dad is in sales, he works and travels on his own time. My sister is in HR. She does all of her work emailing at home because she can’t get to it at work. My cousin is a web designer. He works from home because his job demands it. My aunt is an attorney. She doesn’t work odd hours, just 8-5 everyday, but guess where she does her court prep? HOME! I would submit with no hesitation that some jobs in fields other than education demand (implicitly or explicitly) that some work be completed at home, outside “regular” working hours. Seriously, is this the debate that is worth having here?
JC–I was asking just for information. You gave it to me. I didn’t want to debate–just wanted to know. You provided a good list–I really didn’t know that so many jobs required work outside of the office, so to speak. Personally, I would not have had a problem with working longer hours. However, if teachers work longer hours I believe it should be because the students will get more instruction. Until 150 went from a 7-hour to a 6-hour day at the high school level in the 1980s, I always worked a longer day–and kids went to school longer. However, in fairness, teachers had two prep periods instead of one–I didn’t teach longer; I had more preparation time, but kids were in school longer. My primary complaint with the proposal to lengthen the school day for teachers is that students really will not benefit from teachers sitting in workshops every day. There just isn’t that much to discuss on a daily basis. It would be a waste of time.
Teachers are teachers because there are students. Teachers are paid to teach students… whether they do or not is questionable. Whether or not teachers sitting in an empty building accomplishes anything is not debatable. It is nonsense.
Stop comparing teachers with airline pilots, check out people at the grocery store or rail road workers. There is no reason for a teacher to be in a school without students and no reason for students to be in a school without teachers. (Tell THAT to New York City and other places where they have “rubber rooms”)
If the argument is to keep students AND teachers locked up in school for 2 more hours every day… well… that is just stupid.
So, Sharon, are you saying that teachers in 150 work a 6 1/2 hour day because of budget cuts in the 1980’s?
Exactly. Obviously with a shorter day, fewer teachers were needed. The eventual result–although not the immediate result–was the ending of industrial arts, home economics, and other electives. I believe that was the worst thing that ever happened to education in District 150.
Mahnko – With all the time teachers put in outside of the classroom, preparing lessons, grading papers, training, extra curricular activities (coaching?) and more, they put in well over 40 hours a week.
I hate that I am picking on one persons comments when multiple people have said it, but I feel something needs to be clarified…whether it is a first year primary school teacher’s 34,000 salary, a band teacher’s 72,000 salary or a driver’s ed teacher’s salary of 100,000, they still are getting paid extra to do half of the things that you are mentioning. They get a stipend for extra curricular activities and coaching on top of each of those salaries. They get paid hourly, nearly down to the minute for going to training sessions outside of the 6.5 hour day. In fact, I believe high school teachers still get paid for monitoring the halls between classes, even though it is within the 6.5 hour school day. Here is yet another difference between teaching and the private sector. When most people go to work from 8 – 5, they don’t have the privilege of picking and choosing what their day consists of.
Reading back and forth, it seems both teachers and private sector workers have plenty to learn from each other. It’s too bad there isn’t a way to mingle the two for the benefit of teaching kids in the real world. Maybe even teachers and workers outside of education would learn something!
Baxter, teachers do not get paid to monitor hallways. I know of one Manual teacher who was paid extra for watching the halls during his prep period.
Sharon,
Duties can be assigned during contractual hours that include monitoring hallways between classes. Many schools have a listed schedule for the teachers. My wife has hallway duties at Limestone and they existed at Centralia far before I arrived. Many schools use the time before and after school for assigned bus/hallway duties also.
I am not saying that I think we should have these duties, but they are common in the industry outside of PSD150.
Steve: I was speaking only about District 150–to my knowledge teachers aren’t paid to monitor hallways between classes. However, we were told often that it was our responsibility to be in the hallways during passing time.
I have no horse in this race, but I believe teachers are underpaid, over-worked, and un-appreciated. With all the crap they have to take from the kids and parents, with the stiff requirements to become a teacher, and with the necessary standards they must keep up with, how can anyone belittlea teacher? They are the most important figures (outside parents) our kids will be confronted with during their growing years.
wacko: (outside parents) sadly, many parents of 150 students are extremely poor role models for their children, so yes, it does fall on the backs of their teachers to develop those life skills parents are supposed to provide.
OMG 72 responses on this 150 topic. Some of you posters should have your own blogs to beat this very dead horse some more.
It’s like discussing the future of the Titanic while it is sinking!!
We are trying to organize the lifeboats….
Mike, for whatever reason, C.J.’s blog seems to draw an exceptional number of people interested in District 150. I am very happy that the public and district employees finally have a forum to express our views and to shed light on some issues that face District 150. So far it seems that the best we can do is to organize the lifeboats.
For God Sake, do not, I repeat, DO NOT put anyone on Wisconsin Ave. in charge of anymore lifeboats…….
“an exceptional number of people interested in District 150”
Or rather a vocal few who have an inordinately large amount of things to say.
I appreciate having people interested in the happenings in 150 and who also have an insiders viewpoint. I know of information at my school and some basic 150 information. There are others who know what happens in their school and we have people on here who do a tremendous amount of research in order to back up what they are posting. Shouldn’t we be happy there are people interested enough to spend their time digging to find truths and informing the public?
Are school secretaries available to assist teachers?
As a substitute secretary (who has held a few long term positions), the answer is, typically, no. They have enough to do with assisting the principals, answering phones and greeting parents. Most of the time a volunteer parent will come in to help answer phones, and to help with making copies for teachers.
What would the secretary assist the teacher with?
Kcdad: Secretaries could run off material on the copy machine–teachers spend hours standing at copy machines–before school, after school, and during prep periods. Sometimes students are asked to fill out forms, etc. Teachers are asked to alphabetize them before returning the forms into the office–sounds petty but some of these tasks can be time-consuming when teachers have more immediately important things to do. Teachers, of course, are asked to carry out many clerical chores. All teachers are now required to record all grades on the Skyward computer program. Attendance taking alone and writing admits took up considerable time–home room teachers have to check all-day lists to see if students were absent all day or just part of the day, etc. , and then check their notes from home and write admits–excused or unexcused. Often the unexcused students had to be sent to the office–another document to write. Every day I had to go through a two to three page list of students to locate all of my students in all my classes who had been absent the day before. Then every hour I had to ask if the student had an admit and then send them to the office if they didn’t have an admit. Writing admits at a school such as Manual with a high absentee rate could take the better part of 30 minutes on some days–15 at the least. I believe primary teachers have considerable more paperwork to handle than do high school teachers. Oh, did I forget writing referrals. And do you wonder why some of those discipline problems may be caused by the teacher’s inability to concentrate on students because she/he has to complete all these clerical chores in a very timely fashion. All of these chores take away from teaching time–muti-tasking in the classroom does reduce teaching time. The efficiency with which a teacher does all these clerical chores are often the basis on which administrators judge a teacher’s effectiveness as a teacher when the evaluation is really a “clerical” evaluation.
Working an eight hour day is all fine and good . . . but if you want to go that route, let’s include overtime for time worked above and beyond the eight hours — hours teachers currently put in for “free.” i.e. Registration Day (like today); attending school events — (without teachers in some audiences at many schools, there wouldn’t be an audience); bus duty (which teachers often do for free); preparing units and lesson plans over the summer; preparing classrooms for up to two weeks before school starts; giving students rides home after practice — which is necessary if you want any students on your team (let’s include reimbursement for gas and insurance expenses here too); grading papers, recording grades on a hard-copy, then entering the grades into SkyWard; committee work; etc . . . And . . . I suppose we might as well throw in reimbursements as well. I’ve been in the district for fifteen years and not once has the district provided me with a fan. Who buys ink cartridges? We do. Posters and bulletin board supplies? That’s on us. And how about books to help prepare students for the PSAE / ACT . . . again, largely on us. Check the district’s book list(s) — not a single ACT / PSAE prep. book on it. The list goes on and on . . .
You’ll find that the vast majority of teachers in District 150 go way above and beyond an eight hour day and are glad to do so — don’t even think about the time as “extra” time.
Professional development in District 150 is a joke. Taking rigorous content-related master’s classes is professional development. The horse and pony pitchman shows often passed off as PD — a waste of time. I don’t mind an eight hour day but I do mind spending part of my day with a pitchman as opposed to with my students. I’m a professional — I’ll take master’s classes and do my professional development on my own time.
Also . . . consider discipline. Within the first couple of months of school last year, thousands (literally … I sent a FOIA request to get the information) of referrals were written at the high school level . . . THOUSANDS. Consider how much time is wasted when teachers have to deal with that many discipline problems. 1.) Deal with the problem 2.) (Often) Call Security 3.) Wait for security to arrive 4.) Settle the class down 5.) Open SkyWard 6.) Type in the Referral . . . and then (often times) the dean will come to the door with a question or two about “what happened.” If District 150 were to knock out the discipline madness, HOURS of learning time would be added to the school day.
Jeff Adkins-Dutro,
Excellent post.
Anyone else out there all uptight about the supposed 6.5 hour teacher work day?
And I know that Jeff does all those things and manages to be an excellent father to his five children. Karen is a stay-at-home mom (misnomer as she is often off to school activities with the kids or Jeff). For the last several years, she was the coach of Manual’s speech team–actually, had kids go to state this year for the first time, I believe, in 15 or 20 years.
Nobody is saying that teachers don’t work hard. Nor is anyone saying that teachers only work the contractual minimum of 6.5 hours per day. Arguing against those things is to argue against a point that is not being made.
The point is that the contract only requires 6.5 hours, which is significantly less than the average work day for any profession, including teaching — note that teachers in surrounding school districts work 7.5 to 8 hours. I think it’s fair to ask why. So far, I’ve heard a couple basic complaints.
One is how difficult a teacher’s job is. Granted, teaching is no picnic. But what has that got to do with a contractual 6.5 hour day? Like I said, teachers in surrounding school districts somehow survive a longer contractual work day and presumably face the same challenges. Do East Peoria or Pekin schools not have discipline issues? Do they not have to record grades, grade papers, attend sporting events, etc.? How are they able to handle it, but District 150 teachers can’t?
A related argument is this idea some teachers have that no one can question this issue unless they’ve been a teacher. You have to walk a mile in their shoes before you can even suggest requiring a longer contractual work day. Then, amusingly, they criticize other professions in the same breath — jobs in which they have no experience — saying that those people really don’t work as hard as a teacher. So much for walking a mile in someone else’s shoes before criticizing! This argument fails because teachers are accountable ultimately to the taxpayer, and there’s no requirement that all taxpayers be teachers in order to question how their money is being used for public education. You can’t hide behind your expertise when you’re taking or spending public tax dollars. Can you imagine a military general or the treasury secretary standing up to a Congressman and saying, “Dude, if you’ve never been a general or a banker, you’re simply not qualified to tell me what to do”? That’s not how the chain of command works, I’m afraid.
A second argument has been that a longer contractual work day will result in the district just making teachers attend useless meetings or other things they consider a waste of time. Well, from the comments posted here, it sounds like the district has already required attendance at meetings teachers consider a waste of time — specifically the professional development meetings. So having a shorter work day hasn’t saved anyone from them. In fact, the district reduced instructional time for the kids in order to require additional professional development (teacher collaboration) time for teachers. So it appears that a short work day not only didn’t save teachers from meetings they didn’t want to attend, but reduced teacher-pupil contact time to boot! Doesn’t sound like the strategy is working to me.
But that’s all a red herring anyway, because the contract stipulates how teachers spend their contractual work day. It very specifically lays out how many class periods and prep periods there shall be, how those prep periods can be used, how many PD days there are, etc. So to suggest that lengthening the school day would somehow give the district carte blanche to fill the extra time with meaningless activities is disingenuous. How the extra time would be used would be bargained as part of the contract. Add another prep period or a time to take care of all those clerical activities that teachers are currently doing on their “own” time. Make it part of the contract. If you’re already doing all that stuff anyway, why all the protesting against putting it in the contract?
C.J., if I were still a teacher I probably wouldn’t be so upset–I never was all that in to defending my work habits–they were born out of a Puritan work ethic and had nothing to do with contracts. Why are you criticizing teachers for Wacky Wednesdays–they weren’t in favor of losing time with students. Teachers are definitely at a disadvantage because none of us can find a contract that tells us how many hours the rest of you actually work while you are in your places of employment or what you call “work.” I worked office jobs for two years and several summers–and I (and my bosses) never was busy all 8 hours–there was much just sitting around time and I have always been a hard worker–but there was just nothing to do. It’s no fun when we’re the only ones guessing while you criticize us. We don’t know how many hours you spend on computers e-mailing and reading and writing on blogs. We don’t know how often you just sit around chit-chatting. We don’t know how many of you are free to go out to lunch with friends or to run personal errands during work hours without punching a clock. (Remember we are never allowed to leave our buildings or even our rooms for hours on end). We don’t even know how much money you make. All you say about the contract is quite true and why none of this argument should have ever been on the blogs. Jim, go ahead, we’ve been getting along so well today through e-mails, now I’ll spoil it, but darn it anyway, wasn’t this all brought on by your wanting the public’s opinion about teacher working hours to support your proposal for a longer day? And, unfortunately, I am to blame, also, because I rose to the occasion to defend teachers when I should have just let it go. I could have turned on teachers and agreed with you–I don’t have to work any extra hours any more. In the end, it will all be decided at the bargaining table. You all have put teachers on the defensive by insinuating that we don’t work hard enough or long enough–we’ve probably gone way overboard defending ourselves as all of you would if we attacked your work habits in the same way. Please give us some ammunication so that we can fire back. If you know that teachers work hard and that they work longer than the contractual hours, what on earth do you have to complain about? Don’t you realize that you are getting more than the 8 hours that will give you so much satisfacation. What if teachers just stopped working at the end of their contractual 8 hours and went home period? The union at one time threw out the idea that we should have a work stoppage. I balked at the idea because my classroom would have been in chaos if I stopped taking work home–but that’s what all of you complainers deserve for your children–a teacher that just punches a clock and does no more. Some of you may have gotten one of those “bad” teachers already; otherwise, you probably wouldn’t be complaining so much. There are some among us; I certainly hope the exception, not the rule. I love this one, “This argument fails because teachers are accountable ultimately to the taxpayer.” How many bosses do you have at your place of employment? Do you realize how many bosses teachers have: all those administrators we talk about, all the parents, all the students, quite often the custodians, and all of you taxpayers. I’m sure you all have some clientele that you have to please, but I have discovered that everyone in our society knows how to teach–enough to tell teachers how. My students on occasion used to remind me that their parents paid my salary. I made a joke of it and asked “How do you know that your parents didn’t pay for the desks, or the custodians’ salary, or the cafeteria workers—their money only goes so far, etc.” I have a solution that will make me totally happy. Let all teachers take one taxpayer (preferably those who complain the most because teachers don’t work enough) to every teachers’ meeting and every workshop that is held during the next school year). Sorry! I don’t believe I’ve ever been angry before–but, C.J., you just took me by surprise.
“which is significantly less than the average work day for any profession”
CJ, that just isn’t true…neither doctors in private practice nor hospitals spend 6 1/2 hours with patients, lawyers don’t spend 6 1/2 hours with clients or in court, athletes don’t spend 6 1/2 hours playing every day, politicians rarely spend 6 1/2 hours in session, etc etc…
kcdad — Well, if we’re only counting contact time, then teachers don’t spend 6.5 hours with students either (contractually, that is). Part of that 6.5 hours is prep.
Sharon — I’m disappointed that you see my comments as “attacking” teachers. I never said teachers don’t work enough hours or that they don’t work hard enough. I have nothing but admiration for teachers. I’ve only questioned why the contract only requires 6.5 hours when other teachers have longer contractual work days. You’re quick to want to compare teachers to private professions, but you never address the fact that compared to other teachers D150’s contractual work day is an hour or so less. I also never questioned how teachers spend their time. I just asked why they didn’t include some of what they’re already doing in the contract as part of their contractual work day. What is so hard to understand about that?
C.J.–I’ll take one more stab at this. High teachers used to work a longer day. We had a 7-hour school day. Teachers taught 5 hours and had two preps; students actually had 7 hours of instruction or a monitored study hall. We were expected to come at least 15 minute before school and 15 minutes after. I definitely preferred that schedule because kids were in school longer. I usually got paid extra for taking a study hall. Later, I prefered having my own prep time to do all the things teachers can only do at school. However, I came to school every morning by 5:45 and allowed myself a half hour to have coffee with other teachers who went to the cafeteria and were also available to watch over students who arrived early with no extra pay, voluntary–a whole room full. I usually left at 2:45 or 3 p.m..–I believe that’s nine hours. When I had extra-curricular duties in my earlier years–class sponsor, newspaper–my hours were longer yet with pay. Contractually, principals could call meetings whenever they wanted to before or after school, but not to last longer than the usual school day, except for Tuesdays that were set aside for teachers’ meeting or department meetings. We had a principal who became vindictive for all kinds of reasons and would just stand in front of the room and talk about anything that was upsetting him (sort of like a filibuster) and go on and on and never let us go until the allotted time was over. That, undoubtedly, has something to do with why I wouldn’t want time added to be used at the principal’s descretion. I don’t know who to blame, but I cannot think of very many meetings or workshops that I attended as a teacher that were of any real value in the classroom. The information could have been written out on a piece of paper or in later years sent by e-mail. Those kinds of personal experience have something to do with why we object to added time–it would be misued by administrators. Every day is just too often–what in the world do you think teachers would do in a room together every day for a 45 minutes or an hour? Teachers are actually capable of and often got together after school to talk about school matters and teaching ideas–very informally but very productive–worth more than meetings. Most high school teachers already have extra curricular stuff after school for parts of the year. C.J., I’m glad you didn’t mean to attack teachers–I just heard more criticism there than I usuallly hear from you and was taken aback. Peace.
Okay, Sharon, let me see if I can try to explain what I’ve been reading in a nutshell. Over 20 years ago, District 150 cut an hour off of the teacher’s work day in order to save money–less time worked, less money paid. Is that correct? So, the teachers who started teaching in 150 after the District made that decision, have only known the 6 1/2 hour work day. They have the choice of either staying at school to complete the tasks or to take them home or to a library or coffee shop, etc. They can pick up their children and take care of appointments, lessons, and such and then complete the tasks after the kids are in bed, if they so choose. Now, after more than 20 years, people are questioning the work day? Is the push for the longer work day so that teachers work the same as other professions or is it to have them increase the amount of instruction time that students receive but not to receive additonal pay for it? I can understand why people would want students to receive more instruction in a day. I believe that students in many other countries not only have a longer school day but also a longer school year so if we want to continue to compete with those nations then we must definitely consider such things.
j-darcy, that is the best summary of the issue I have yet read. My desk at home is just as useful and I like grading papers in my recliner at home. I like doing lesson plans in my air conditioned home instead of my hot classroom. Others feel like they do the extra stuff better at school and so it may appear that they are working harder.
J-Darcy–I’m happy to answer your questions. Yes, the district made the decision to cut out x number of high school teachers (most sent to primary school K-8 then); therefore, high school students were only in classes for six hours a day. I have no idea how all that affected the lower grade time schedue. Therefore, teachers were not needed for that extra hour. To be honest, I am not sure whether or not we took a pay cut–possibly but most of the money saved was just to get rid of positions. This wasn’t a teacher choice (at least, I don’t recall; I wasn’t in the union at the time and it may have been negotiated)–it meant the loss of many electives for students–inudstrial arts, home ec, psychology, sociology, journalism, etc. Memory is coming back because I did join the union then because a friend of mine with seniority, a master’s degree in history (the only one in her department with a history masters), head of the department, had to leave because they needed to save all the coaches in the social studies department–thus, due to Terry Knapp’s negotiations came the strict seniority rule for transfers. Yes, from then for that hour, the teachers essentially had the choice of taking work home and all that you said. Many stayed anyway to work in their rooms, conferences with kids (which we have forgotten to mention as one of the reasons most of us stayed later many nights), and extra-curricular activities. Now after 20 years it has become an issue primarily due to Jim Stowell’s bringing the issue forward and, also, because of the new educational buzz words “common planning” and “teacher collaboration”–neither of which are very important and even appropriate at the high school level.
This move will not provide students with any more instruction time. I would not be complaining if students received more instruction time. This is what upset me about C.J.’s argument that because everyone else works 8 hours IN A BUILDING; teachers should, also. I know that hourly workers are tied to a location and a building or workplace, but many other professionals have much more freedom of movement–I think and are trusted to get their work done however best suits them–why can’t teachers do that? The move seems designed only to make the taxpayers and maybe a board member happy–students will not benefit. Taxpayers want their money’s worth and want to be able to walk in a building and see their money at work–although I didn’t say many at Manual. Teachers who generally don’t take work home still won’t take work home and they will just sit around doing nothing with the rest while in the meetings. The only teachers who will be hurt are those who will still work another 1/2 day at home (3 to 4 hours). I’m curious about one thing–what happened to flex time in the work place; I thought that was the big change in corporate America. Just tell us why the work we do at home isn’t just as productive for our students–why does where we work make one bit of difference? My cousin who was an engineer at Cat almost never went to work. He did all his work at home–computers allow people to have all sorts of working arrangements. I’m sure no one else wanted to hear from me again. Let administrators worry about whether or not teachers grade papers, prepare lessons, give tests, etc.–check the teachers to see if their work is getting done, not how much time they spend in a building. Thanks for asking, J-Darcy. I just gave you more to wade through–that’s who I am.
Wolf: Yes, Terry, told me to mention the air conditioning–I forgot that. I left ASAP in the hot months–unbearable on the second floor–now teachers can sit in a hot room listening to speakers on those hot days–probably not because administrators won’t want to leave their air-conditioned offices. Most professionals don’t work without air conditioning. The main thing I love about retirement is having air conditioning all day for the 6 hot months of the year–I, also, taught summer school in the heat. Yes, and the recliner made papers easier to grade–with a pitcher of water and maybe even TV for some kinds of grading. And the phone right next to the recliner to call parents if necessary–I had my own little command center for the evening–everything designed for grading papers, etc.
Sharon said:
“I’m curious about one thing–what happened to flex time in the work place; I thought that was the big change in corporate America. Just tell us why the work we do at home isn’t just as productive for our students–why does where we work make one bit of difference?”
I agree – for those majority of teachers who do work at home (and those same teachers are typically available to students and parents beyond normal school hours). However, tenure protects those teachers who do the bare minimum, and for the most part, there is no tenure in corporate America.
Sharon, you’ve been critical of teaching to the lowest common denominator. Tenure, and the union itself, protects the bottom of the barrel when it comes to teachers. Yes, the vast majority of teachers work far more than 40 hours under extremely difficult conditions – classroom teachers are always “on” – but there are crappy teachers who have long ago checked out and nothing can seem to be done about once they’re tenured.
Would you give up tenure to keep the professional flexibility of a minimum 6 1/2 hour workday?
No, because the crappy teachers will still exist because “surprise” it isn’t the union that’s protecting them; it’s their friends, the principals. And it is the good teachers whose jobs will always be at the mercy of the administrators. Their jobs will always be on the line because they are the ones who frequently call into question things that aren’t done right or even honestly in the school. They will be the teachers who do stick out their necks to protect other teachers being criticized for unfair reasons. There will be no whistle blowers without tenure. Good teachers will be at the mercy of parents with clout (remember the Lindbergh parents who preferred the old principal and the favors they received) who will complain that their kids’ grades aren’t high enough, and principals, wanting to please the parents, will fire the teachers who grade honestly, etc. Advanced math classes were taken away from one of Manual’s best teachers because the student earned a B instead of an A in the class–and the parent had clout with the principal. There is no end to the list of less than conscientious teachers that we could all name that are the principal’s strong supporters–that’s their Ace in the Hole instead of being good teachers. Please you’ve seen this happen in many workplaces. Not all “valuable” employees are productive. You all keep clinging to the evils of tenure. I really think you don’t understand the system. Any principal can get rid of any teacher if he/she is willing to take the time to gather the evidence–it does take work, but it should take work to ruin someone’s career. During the last years of my career, I started questioning some unfair policies and reporting some of the unfair things going on in my building–I did so only because I knew I was fairly untouchable and that I had not done anything that could be held against me as a teacher (because of tenure). The principal on several occasions called me or other teachers and me to meetings with the personnel director for no other reason than to try to intimidate us. I didn’t lose any of those arguments. Several of these situations were due to grades that students had earned–grades the principal would prefer to have been passing grades. I kept good records, so I didn’t really have much to worry about. Another interesting factor–all the meetings were during the day–when a sub had to be paid to take my classes. None of them were after school to cut into the time of the principal or personnel director. Anyway I just can’t agree that tenure and the union are the cuprits. For the last four years, 150’s union leadership has been very weak–didn’t handle most of the grievances that teachers turned in. Do you think there have been more teachers losing their jobs because of a weak union? I don’t think so. I promise that I will try to stay away from the computer tomorrow. Maybe the kids will come over.
Wow! I was too hard on principals. I still stand by some examples of what I just stated. But, you know, some poor teachers are just really nice people. Kindhearted principals would find it hard to push an older teacher out–one who probably couldn’t get another job. Besides it isn’t that easy to identify the lousy teachers–I know I would find it hard to trust my own judgments. I have never seen it fail that one teacher has many students who hate him or her and the same number that really like the teacher. Besides, at the high school level if some students hate a teacher that doesn’t necessarily make the teacher a poor teacher. I was never in any of those situations, so I really don’t know how it would feel to be unfairly judged by parents or students–just minor understandable complaints or misunderstandings now and then that were easily resolved–but I’ve seen it happen. Sometimes the kids really like teachers who don’t work all that hard–they just have a good time in the class. I’m curious. What are some of the characteristics that prove that a teacher is not a good teacher? Beauty is in the eye of the holder and where teachers are concerned it’s hard to discern. I do believe that bad teachers in the lower grades are more dangerous than at the high school level–a bad teacher that can diminish a child’s worth all day needs to be let go. At the high school level, kids only have a teacher for one hour and today’s teenagers know how to complain to the right people or to torture the teacher. 🙂
I spent the morning with Jeff and his kids at Peoria High while Jeff prepared his bulletin boards. When I stopped into see Randy Simmons (another former student), I told him that I went off on principals on the blog, but I had to write a second time when I remembered that my experiences (and actually his, too.) cause me to forget that there are good principals out there. Jeff showed me the practice test for the ACT language arts tests–have any of you seen these tests? The subject-matter alone is enough to cause kids to close the test booklet and go to sleep or just to guess. One page-long passage was all about 401K Retirement Plans and then the questions were about the passage–talk about relevant material for high school tests–whose main purpose is to test reading ability.
Tried to stay out of this debate, but…
You know, I find it interesting that some of the same people who proclaim, “You knew what you were getting into when you chose to be an educator” in regards to discipline, extra work, pay scales, etc., are the ones who are now complaining about the length of teachers’ “official” workdays and “all of the days off” educators get. I would turn the statement back on you…
If YOU are willing to take your college degree and work 180-plus (and yes there are pluses like Fee Day) days a year in a non-air-conditioned classroom with XX number of students, a 25-minute lunch period with no opportunity to leave, probably by yourself, with almost no chance to go to the bathroom, take or make phone calls or communicate with another adult during the school day, and then handle multiple hours of additional work, meetings, parent contacts and other work-related activity, while taking additional post-graduate classes to advance yourself on the pay scale, then BY ALL MEANS go for it. You are welcome to join us if you have the qualifications.
If teaching is such an easy/cushy job, why aren’t all of you out there trying to get in??
Inquiring minds want to know.
Maybe you don’t feel like being called a m$(%*r f*$%(r by a student multiple times a day or be threatened that a student will come to your house, kick you ass and cut your child with a broken beer bottle. But hey, it’s only 180 days a year, right? I’m sure retail and service workers deal with that kind of language and threats daily, let alone BS and above degree positions.
Well we put up with that and more to educate Peoria’s kids. Every school day. Tell us again how little we work. Hours aren’t everything. And what hours teachers in Dunlap, East Peoria and other districts work is apples to oranges. Sorry. It’s why a nurse in a doctor’s office makes less than a nurse in an emergency room.
“If teaching is such an easy/cushy job, why aren’t all of you out there trying to get in??
Inquiring minds want to know.”
It’s called teacher certification and it’s a huge barrier to entry. If President Obama wanted to teach 2nd grade in a public school, he’d have to go back to college for a year and a half first. Not to mention that his salary would be the same as some kid straight out of college.
I have great respect for teachers as a whole and the demands of the profession. I just don’t think that those who are certified are the only ones who can teach.
Jon, they are not, but every profession has a degree. I don’t think that teaching has the same degree of skill as being a doctor or lawyer or President, but there is still some training that schools need to know that you have. It IS more than just knowing the material. Reaching kids is very tough. Even the certification process in College falls short of the goal. For example, I know how to add and subtract fractions, but I had a real tough time teaching my Algebra students that my first two years teaching. I felt that my students would already know the basics, so I never was trained to teach that particular skill. My Calculus classes, Abstract Algebra classes and Non-Euclidean Geometry classes in College did NOT prepare me well for teaching addition more than one way. When the students still were confused, I had to adapt my teaching. That is the argument behind paying teachers more after they have been around. Granted, you do have a diminished rate of improvement, I am sure. A 30 year teacher does not necessarily know more than a 25 year teacher, but some may and all are rewarded for it. I see flaws and as a mid-veteran am sure I will see changes in our pay schedule in the future. However, this all may just lead to the further deteriation of our middle class.