White Teachers will be the first to go:Minneapolis

Yappi said:
Haven't read the article yet. Just curious, are they saying that they are firing individuals with 20+ years of service at one school and keeping workers with 5 years of experience at another school in the district? That doesn't seem to be normal. I would think that schools that have cuts would move those with seniority over to another school in the district and bump someone with less experience.
Click to expand...
First, because performance is thrown out the door as a criteria, you must assume that for purposes of termination, every teacher is an equal performer. The provision simply states that while seniority is the predominant factor in termination decisions, demographics of "under represented groups" may also be considered. It does not mean that blacks will keep their jobs over whites, it simply says that they are allowed to consider it. A practical example ... Say enrollment drops in a predominately black school where 4 teachers need to be cut. The lowest 5 in seniority include 4 blacks and a white. The white teacher has 1 more year than the lowest black. The argument could be made that demographics and diversity could factor rather than just basing it on 1 more year of tenure.
 
ProV1 said:
First, because performance is thrown out the door as a criteria, you must assume that for purposes of termination, every teacher is an equal performer. The provision simply states that while seniority is the predominant factor in termination decisions, demographics of "under represented groups" may also be considered. It does not mean that blacks will keep their jobs over whites, it simply says that they are allowed to consider it. A practical example ... Say enrollment drops in a predominately black school where 4 teachers need to be cut. The lowest 5 in seniority include 4 blacks and a white. The white teacher has 1 more year than the lowest black. The argument could be made that demographics and diversity could factor rather than just basing it on 1 more year of tenure.
Click to expand...
Why are they not moving the higher seniority teachers that are being cut to another school in the district? If 5 teachers need to be cut at one school, find the 5 lowest seniority teachers district-wide and let them go. Then move 5 teachers from the target school to new schools.
 
Yappi said:
Why are they not moving the higher seniority teachers that are being cut to another school in the district? If 5 teachers need to be cut at one school, find the 5 lowest seniority teachers district-wide and let them go. Then move 5 teachers from the target school to new schools.
Click to expand...
Again, because lets say that all 5 end up being black and actioning all of them leaves no black teachers in the district that is 70% black students. They want to avoid that and use demographics as a factor ... not even the primary one. This is an extreme example but trying to show the point of it. I think posters think that a 20 year white teacher in good standing is going to get axed for a 1 year black teacher. That would never fly regardless of the union contract.
 
They wouldn't even have to move the 5 with the lowest seniority. They could move whoever they wanted. That way, they can use race to determine which teachers get moved to new schools but not which 5 get cut.

I think you/they are making this more complicated than it has to be. Using race for cutting teachers just shouldn't happen.
 
ProV1 said:
Again, because lets say that all 5 end up being black and actioning all of them leaves no black teachers in the district that is 70% black students. They want to avoid that and use demographics as a factor ... not even the primary one. This is an extreme example but trying to show the point of it. I think posters think that a 20 year white teacher in good standing is going to get axed for a 1 year black teacher. That would never fly regardless of the union contract.
Click to expand...
Why do you always bring up the color of someone's skin? It's like you are a racist or something. I look at people in a classroom as students...you look at them by their skin color.
 
Yappi said:
They wouldn't even have to move the 5 with the lowest seniority. They could move whoever they wanted. That way, they can use race to determine which teachers get moved to new schools but not which 5 get cut.

I think you/they are making this more complicated than it has to be. Using race for cutting teachers just shouldn't happen.
Click to expand...
You obviously do not understand. This has nothing to do with moving teachers. It only has to do with 2 things. First, that black teachers have been historically more affected by budget cuts and reductions than white teachers. Second, the contract now says that seniority is not the only factor that can determine who is cut. They are allowed to factor teacher diversity of the entire district.

If I wanted to make a straw man argument, precedent aside and if you are taking performance out of the equation, why is seniority a better factor than diversity? Again, taking performance out, what makes tenure more favorable than diversity whether it be black, white, male , female, able bodied, disabled, veteran, non-veteran etc....?
 
Tesoro said:
Why do you always bring up the color of someone's skin? It's like you are a racist or something. I look at people in a classroom as students...you look at them by their skin color.
Click to expand...
I did not bring color into this. The person who started the thread did. See the title. I'm just commenting on the thread about race. Duh.
 
ProV1 said:
You obviously do not understand. This shas nothing to do with moving teachers. It only has to do with 2 things. First, that black teachers have been historically more affected by budget cuts and reductions than white teachers. Second, the contract now says that seniority is not the only factor that can determine who is cut. They are allowed to factor teacher diversity of the entire district.

If I wanted to make a straw man argument, precedent aside and if you are taking performance out of the equation, why is seniority a better factor than diversity? Again, taking performance out, what makes tenure more favorable than diversity whether it be black, white, male , female, able bodied, disabled, veteran, non-veteran etc....?
Click to expand...
Tenure is fair and very specific. "Diversity" is a one-way street with vagueness built in. I've yet to hear of any "diversity" programs that search for males or whites. The number of female teachers at the elementary level are 4-to-1 female. For the sake of diversity, should women be cut before men at elementary schools?
 
ProV1 said:
You obviously do not understand. This has nothing to do with moving teachers. It only has to do with 2 things. First, that black teachers have been historically more affected by budget cuts and reductions than white teachers. Second, the contract now says that seniority is not the only factor that can determine who is cut. They are allowed to factor teacher diversity of the entire district.
Click to expand...


No, they're not; it is illegal.
 
ProV1 said:
As I have already said, performance is the best way to make RIF decisions so I am not sure who you think you are preaching to. I simply said that after that, factoring demographics is better than seniority.

That said, your post has an obvious racist tone. Performance is not factored in these RIFs so asserting that the black teachers are "inferior" with no other basis for your characterization strongly infers they are inferior because of their blackness.
Click to expand...
In the realm of education innercity schools are academically inferior to suburban schools. Is it race, culture or economics?

But yes, many suburban districts would not hire or accept the quality of teachers that the innercity would and does. When the pool of kids tests scores are disparate as they are between innercity and suburban, it is no surprise educators returning to teach at the schools they graduated from will on average be of a lower academic standard than their suburban neighbors. This does not mean they can not be great people in every other way.
 
ProV1 said:
First, nobody said anything about less capable. It has already been established that performance is not considered. Second, you would have to be a moron to not consider demographics when building an organization. Any entity operating in anything outside a sandbox knows that when competing in a diverse environment, there is tremendous value in building similar characteristics into an organization. You obviously have not built or led a thing.
Click to expand...
Less capable is what you end up with when the primary motivation is checking boxes.

Demographics have nothing to do with ability to do a job. How many NFL teams have a white corner on their 2 deep? Uh oh better bring in some white guys...they may not be as good as the guy they replace but at least we virtue signaling points.

All black male starting 5? Better find a woman to replace one of them. She can't compete but at least we are doing our part in the name of diversity.

Your IT department isn't any better because you checked boxes. The curriculum isn't taught any better because you checked boxes.

Give me the most capable in a given field period. If it's all black guys fine. If it's all Latino women fine. Handicapping yourself in the name of diversity is stupid.

Diversity of thought is the only diversity that matters. Not race, gender etc.
 
Yappi said:
Tenure is fair and very specific. "Diversity" is a one-way street with vagueness built in. I've yet to hear of any "diversity" programs that search for males or whites. The number of female teachers at the elementary level are 4-to-1 female. For the sake of diversity, should women be cut before men at elementary schools?
Click to expand...
What makes tenure faIr? Tenure has zero to do with fairness. It is nothing more than how long you have done something good or bad.
 
D4fan said:
In the realm of education innercity schools are academically inferior to suburban schools. Is it race, culture or economics?

But yes, many suburban districts would not hire or accept the quality of teachers that the innercity would and does. When the pool of kids tests scores are disparate as they are between innercity and suburban, it is no surprise educators returning to teach at the schools they graduated from will on average be of a lower academic standard than their suburban neighbors. This does not mean they can not be great people in every other way.
Click to expand...
So student performance is the sole way to evaluate teacher performance. Is that you position? Are you sure ypu want to double down on that take?
 
y2h said:
Less capable is what you end up with when the primary motivation is checking boxes.

Demographics have nothing to do with ability to do a job. How many NFL teams have a white corner on their 2 deep? Uh oh better bring in some white guys...they may not be as good as the guy they replace but at least we virtue signaling points.

All black male starting 5? Better find a woman to replace one of them. She can't compete but at least we are doing our part in the name of diversity.

Your IT department isn't any better because you checked boxes. The curriculum isn't taught any better because you checked boxes.

Give me the most capable in a given field period. If it's all black guys fine. If it's all Latino women fine. Handicapping yourself in the name of diversity is stupid.

Diversity of thought is the only diversity that matters. Not race, gender etc.
Click to expand...
Nobody ever said the primary motivation is checking boxes. You just made that up.

Nobody ever said demographics have anything to do with ability to do a specific job. It has to do with organizational effectiveness.

Old white guys from the woods or young black guys from the hood don’t have diversity of thought by themselves.

This whole concept is way above your pay grade
 
ProV1 said:
What makes tenure faIr? Tenure has zero to do with fairness. It is nothing more than how long you have done something good or bad.
Click to expand...
Because that is what everyone signed up for when they began teaching. Simple as that. Changing the rules mid-game is not fair. Grandfather in all the teachers who started when tenure was the tool used for deciding who stays and goes.

From this point forward, you can choose diversity as the method for new hires. Just make sure you spell it out clearly what diversity means.
 
ProV1 said:
Seniority is a dumb way to make these decisions. It means nothing in terms of effectiveness. I would say job performance is most important and then having teachers that represent the demographics of the students they teach would be 2nd. Walking in another man’s shoes goes a long way in the ability to lead them.
Click to expand...
That sounds like segregation with extra steps.
 
ProV1 said:
So student performance is the sole way to evaluate teacher performance. Is that you position? Are you sure ypu want to double down on that take?
Click to expand...
That's not what I said., reread it.

I will stand by my point that when comparing teachers who attended these failing schools then return to teach at them, in general, they are academically challenged when compared to their suburban counterparts and that is irrespective of race. Culture and acclamation to standards will predict future productivity much more effectively than race, age or religion will.

And yes, I would actually like to triple down on that.?
 
Yappi said:
Because that is what everyone signed up for when they began teaching. Simple as that. Changing the rules mid-game is not fair. Grandfather in all the teachers who started when tenure was the tool used for deciding who stays and goes.

From this point forward, you can choose diversity as the method for new hires. Just make sure you spell it out clearly what diversity means.
Click to expand...
I never said they did not sign up for it. I said it is no better than demographic criteria to determine if a teacher should be kept.
 
D4fan said:
That's not what I said., reread it.

I will stand by my point that when comparing teachers who attended these failing schools then return to teach at them, in general, they are academically challenged when compared to their suburban counterparts and that is irrespective of race. Culture and acclamation to standards will predict future productivity much more effectively than race, age or religion will.

And yes, I would actually like to triple down on that.?
Click to expand...
Who ever said anything about the teachers having attended the same school they now teach at? Assuming they all have the requisite degrees, where they attended grade school and high school is irrelevant to this discussion. But since you decided to throw in an unrelated point, please show your work. What evidence is there that teachers who have come back to teach at an alma mater are failing? Do you have a comparison between those teachers and others that went to different high schools?
 
ProV1 said:
Who ever said anything about the teachers having attended the same school they now teach at? Assuming they all have the requisite degrees, where they attended grade school and high school is irrelevant to this discussion. But since you decided to throw in an unrelated point, please show your work. What evidence is there that teachers who have come back to teach at an alma mater are failing? Do you have a comparison between those teachers and others that went to different high schools?
Click to expand...
It is a well known issue innercity schools face, I assumed you were at least up on that point.

Innercity schools send out recruiting teams to job fairs in hope of attracting good teachers. The suburbs meanwhile, are awash with applicants. Now the next part requires a bit of logical deduction, but if suburban districts get to pick from many applicants, while innercity districts are wide open (Google for plenty of articles on this topic) where do you think the less qualified candidates will land?

Furthermore, when a family member of mine did their innercity placement as required for their degree, the innercity teachers, parents and kids let them know they were not interested in high standards of education and reduced their role to that of babysitter. Parents complained if much was demanded of their kids, and soon they were wanting the little white devil to move on. The little white devil landed at a well known high academic functioning public school, but had to compete with over 1,000 applicants for the handful of jobs available. Parents loved the academic rigor such teachers required, and expected their children to comply and work as requested by the teacher. Logic says that school will have much more highly qualified teachers as they picked from the large pool of applicants, and had high expectations for their children.
 
ProV1 said:
So is terminating blacks at a disproportional rate to their white counterparts so per my original post, they all can be pissed off now.
Click to expand...
if they laid off black people because they were black you would actually be right for the first time ever.

However, because it was done by seniority and programs only completely ignoring race.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top