As of 2004, there were over 7,000,000, that’s seven million corporations in the U.S.A. and if they were all run like the public school system, they would all be bankrupt. I allow this letter on my blog site to show how well educated people like Jerry Becker have empathy for the populist bent that is destroying a large part of the educational system in this country. Or maybe Dr. Becker is just publishing another teacher's opinion.
Yes, I agree, that many large Corporations had and have boards made up of "good old boys and girls" but what would one expect out of 7 millions corporate businesses? Most anyone also realizes that many school boards make decisions that are detrimental to our system. But many of these board members are elected because better qualified people do not want to put their established reputations attacked by unqualified journalists and liberal editorial boards. Unfortunately, people are elected who are not qualified to run large school systems. Especially in non-community based schools like School District #150 in Peoria.
This 28 year union member teacher, tries to defend the promotion by seniority that seldom works in more than 7 million corporations in this country, many of these corporations being small businesses and not at all like the few large corporations that sometimes abuse the system. He tries to defend the ugly, lengthy and costly legal process to fire teachers. A system that allows many teachers who should not be teaching others to make more money every year and accumulate more retirement and health care benefits.
He is absolutely opposed to incentives which are the backbone of the private sector. The private sector overall does not support tenure nor promote on tenure. They do support performance and loyalty as long as economic conditions permit. That some large corporations with "tort" CEO's went bankrupt for failing to perform. Hand picked boards failed to ask the right questions yet picked up their "tort" pay. But to brand the more than 7 million corporations and their boards; most of them do not have boards, as incompetent is extreme populism and ignorance. This man taught kids for 28 years. No wonder this country IS on a downward slant to socialism.
Since much of the problems in society, both public and private, are the result of incompetent but well meaning Board of Directors. The question here is how to correct the public school system, the foremost priority of all communities. Here is an idea that I've pointed out in numerous blogs:
Elected school boards should be small, maybe as few as three. If three was the number decided by a volunteer committee, redistricting would be necessary to allow all of the citizens to be represented. The positions should be full time and and elected board members must be well paid. They should each have a small office and share a common secretary. Elected terms should be 3 years with a 9 year limit of consecutive service. Three years after the first election, one board member must leave the board; I suggest that member be the one who drew the least number of votes. This would leave two experienced members on the board. In the sixth year or 2nd election; possibly by lottery or least number of votes, a six year or 2nd term member must leave the board and a new member elected. This process would then continue with 2 experienced board member serving at election time. This system would allow new talent to come aboard. Any board member could re-run for office three years after completion of their elected term.
Under no circumstances should this board hire an educator to administrate systems the size of Peoria with a budget over $150 million. Look what education administrators have done to Peoria Public School District #150 financial system and business administration. Superintendents must have a background based on business administration, marketing and finance. Educators would be hired as Associate Administrators.
The current system in Peoria School District #150 elects school board members to 5 year terms with no pay, no office, and with little secretarial help. The new system would allow a member to serve as long as nine years but that member could be removed as could any elected official in the public sector who fails to perform as per contract. Public officials in say, Peoria County or City, can be voted out of office so admittedly there is only job security for the term for which they were elected.
These high paying positions would attract a better quality of board members. This is no insult to current board members or superintendents. The current system in place for a couple of centurys must be changed similar to the change made in D.C This system established a couple of years ago appears to be working as best it can under extremely difficult conditions.
A volunteer committee appointed by the Mayor would oversee the whole system and would appoint someone to fill the unexpired term of any board member leaving their elected position before their term of office was completed. This committee would also be composed of rotating members to here again bring fresh ideas to the system.
Sounds impossible to change laws and systems because resistance to change? Sure, but better to try some well thought out and planned changes than to continue on our path to mediocrity. Change has to start with new ideas. Has this country run out of innovation in our public sector as some intellects believe?
Here is the widely circulated letter.
Merle
----- Original Message -----
From: Jerry Becker
To: JERRY-P-BECKER-USA-L@listserv.siu.edu
Sent: Monday, July 19, 2010 12:59 PM
Subject: Corporate Criticism of Teacher Pay Is Sheer Hypocrisy
*************************
From Education Week [American Education's Newspaper of Record], Monday, July 19, 2010. See http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/walt_gardners_reality_check/2010/07/corporate_criticism_of_teacher_pay_is_hypocrisy.html
*************************
Corporate Criticism of Teacher Pay Is Sheer Hypocrisy
By Walt Gardner
Corporate leaders have repeatedly demanded that teachers be paid strictly on the basis of the performance of their students because that's how the "real world" works. Yet even when they miss their goals, top executives continue to receive fat paychecks, including generous bonuses. Curiously, this double standard is given short shrift in the debate over school reform.
In the summer and fall of 2007, the Securities and Exchange Commission sent letters to 350 corporations to gather information about how executive pay is determined. The SEC expected full cooperation in light of of public anger over the issue. But instead, it had to send second letters to a majority of the same companies because of the unsatisfactory replies it received. Their lackadaisical response raised some eyebrows at the time, but nothing much beyond that reaction. What has emerged since then, however, is a three-part pattern of hypocrisy about corporate remuneration that can no longer be ignored.
First, corporate leaders reluctantly admit there are unquantifiable elements that determine their individual compensation packages. This, of course, is precisely what teachers have maintained all along about teaching. But teachers are accused of making excuses when they argue that non-cognitive outcomes, for example, are not as easily measured as numeracy and literacy.
Second, the same corporate leaders claim that linking their remuneration to earnings and stock prices would force them to excessively focus on short-term results, which are bad for stockholders. But when teachers say that judging their effectiveness disproportionately on standardized test scores would be bad for students because this metric narrows the curriculum and turns classrooms into test preparation factories, their claim is met with utter disdain.
Third, corporate leaders finally play their trump card. They huff that they can be ultimately fired when they don't deliver, whereas public school teachers cannot because of union rules. What they don't admit, however, is that in the boardroom, symbiosis exists on a scale rarely seen elsewhere. As a result, it's the exception, rather than the rule, that ineffectiveness leads to dismissal.
Here's why: the pay of the CEO is set by the board of directors - usually the compensation committee. Although the directors are elected by the stockholders via proxies, most are not returned. Therefore, the board is chosen essentially by the CEO. Once directors are on the board, they don't leave. Why should they? They get handsome pay for sitting in meetings, generous insurance, and a comfortable pension. Moreover, they fly on private jets to luxury resorts to attend conferences. Even if a CEO is finally fired by the board, he/she can walk away in one year with more money than 50 teachers earn in a lifetime. It's not called a golden parachute for nothing. As Mel Brooks quipped in The History of the World, "It's good to be the king."
Stockholders, of course, are free to turn to the courts for a remedy, but the odds are stacked against them. Big business has deep pockets and wears down plaintiffs. Yet the same coddled executives are quick to attack teachers unions for trying to protect their members' right of due process. It's enough to make any fair-minded person sick.
---------------------------
PHOTO SIDEBAR: Walt Gardner taught for 28 years in the Los Angeles Unified School District and was a lecturer in the UCLA Graduate School of Education.
*******************************************
--
No comments:
Post a Comment