After playing around on the Internet for a while it occurred to me that I don't have a post on the front page of the blog. Well, I simply can't have that.
Unlike most of the stuff I write on this blog, today's post comes from Maryland, and more specifically, deals with education.
Maryland's education officials are offering class time and in some cases academic and community service credit to students who attend a downtown Annapolis rally that will encourage legislators to accept the Thornton Commission's reccommendations on school funding. The article raises a number of issues, including whether its proper to allow students participating in advocacy (and in this case political) activities to receive community service credit toward graduation. Further, is it appropriate for schools to use government money in order to lobby the government? And I was prepared to talk about both of those issues (and a couple of others) except that I then read another article dealing with teachers.
Today's Sun also reports that Baltimore City School chief Bonnie Copeland has announced the preparation of plans to layoff about 1200 city teachers if the teachers do not agree to either a temporary pay cut or furlough. The Baltimore Teacher's Union is expected to vote on the issue tommorrow morning. It's likely that any cost-cutting efforts that include pay cuts or furloughs will be rejected, and layoffs will begin.
These two articles kinda got me thinking: What in the hell is wrong with teachers?
I'm prepared to look beyond the rather smarmy tactic of literally busining in hordes of uninterested students to a rally so that the teacher's union can demand more money from the government. What's more troubling to me is the fact that none of these "concerned" teachers used this opportunity as a chance to (gasp) teach. Couldn't some enterprising young civics teacher assign his or her class to research the issues involved in the education funding debate? They could hold mock committee meetings and travel to Annapolis to observe the actual proceedings or have an audience with their representative. Heck, they could even write letters to their representatives that urge support (or comdenation, in a perfect world) for the Thornton measures. But at least they'd be learning, instead of being treated like interchangeable cogs in the teacher's union's unwavering efforts to pry loose every last dime that the government has and call it "helping kids." (Not only are they not learning, but they're being used for poltical purposes and are receiving kickbacks as a result. Anyone wondering why kids grow increasingly cynical about politics and government?)
The second article is even more clear than the first. Teachers are willing to take themselves out of the classroom rather than accept a pay cut. While the pay cut (which would be temporary, by the way) would be across the board, meaning that everyone (including administrators, facilitators and janitors) would be affected, the job losses will affect teachers more so than other people connected to the schools. The teachers, either because of stubborness, or stupidity or corruption (or more likely a combination of all three) are willing to let their students take the fall, rather than themselves. What's their answer? Increase the amount of time given to paying off the $58 million cumulative budget deficit from the current projection of 18 months to several years. Forgive me for sounding cynical, but I'm guessing I'm not the only person who thinks the Union's timetable for debt reduction would be so long that it would coincide with a number of vital teacher pay raises.
Look, I know that a great many people who are teachers are good at their job. They are dedicated and want what's best for their students. But as a group, teachers behave just like any other special interest group in this country. Just like the farmers and the elderly, they line up at the great government trough elbowing each other in order to get the best chance at the most money.
(Coincidentally, the Democrats being in bed with all three of these groups is a large part of their problem)
Is more money going to help our schools? Probably not. But what could help is teachers putting aside their own personal poltical agendas and re-dedicating themselves to the ideals that got them into teaching in the first place: because they wanted to help children. (Or couldn't find anything else they were good at in college. Either way.)
Tony
