<p>On tonight's show, John Stossel was seen facing a mob of vociferous and hardly intelligible teachers who were led by the well-known union diva, Randi Weingarten. She challenged John Stossel to teach for a week, and it seems that the reporter might accept. So, there will more of the same! </p>
<p>Of course only a cynic would point out that Randi Weingarten might not have seen the inside of a class room in a decade, let alone teach a class, and had to fake the renewal of her certification. However, that would not be much news from a union leader.</p>
<p>I am happy that the UFT decided to challenge Stossel's findings ... not to witness the vindication of that fine group -as if that were possible- but to see more of its shenanigans exposed on national television! </p>
<p>PS I am wondering how many substitutes had to be called to replace the "excused" teachers. Again, what's new in NYC!</p>
<p>I hope John Stossel is able to "teach for a week." Of course, I wouldn't put it past the union thugs from denying him the opportunity because he may not have a teacher's cert (as if that means anything). The one thing that the books that give the "low down" on various colleges have revealed is that college students view "education major" as the easy major on campus (and the students have the lowest SAT scores on the campuses). What a surprise! LOL</p>
<p>I still haven't seen an explanation on why the European students scored higher than the American students. These were not students from a poor school district.</p>
<p>I missed the follow up last night . . . is it available anywhere on line?</p>
<p>"Of course, I wouldn't put it past the union thugs from denying him the opportunity because he may not have a teacher's cert (as if that means anything)."</p>
<p>"The one thing that the books that give the "low down" on various colleges have revealed is that college students view "education major" as the easy major on campus (and the students have the lowest SAT scores on the campuses). What a surprise! LOL"</p>
<p>I haven't seen the episodes, but those are really derogatory remarks to make about teachers in general.</p>
<p>They behaved like union thugs. And if merely having a teacher's cert was proof of anything, our schools wouldn't be in the shape they are in. The best teachers are the best because of their TALENTS, not because they possess that piece of paper.</p>
<p>It's not my fault that the "insider" type college books include students' comments that they (the students) view the Education major as the easiest on campus and the its students have the lowest SAT scores. When students are applying, those with lower stats are admitted into the ed college, while higher stats are required for the other colleges within the same university. If this is a fact, then it should be known and not hidden just because it might be "derogatory." Ed colleges should require higher stats, not lower stats.</p>
<p>The follow-up was very brief. The main part showed a group of teachers picketing and hurling expletives in front of the office of John Stossel. When he came out, he tried to talk to the teachers but was booed. They accused him of one-sided journalism and pretended that he called all teachers lazy. His reply was that he did NOT call all teachers lazy, but showed that more than a few deserved the adjective. One interesting tidbit was that there was a dialogue about the teachers who acted "improperly" but were protected by the unions and kept on the payroll. One teacher advanced that NO teachers should be fired but that they should be "recycled." And so it goes!</p>
<p>Good teachers should rightfully be annoyed by reports such as Stossel's. However, they might start by pointing the finger to their own "management" that goes through such length to protect an army of misfits and lazy abusers and has grown to nothing more than a political group. One rotten apple is enough to spoil the entire basket. Why good teachers are not revolting against their own leaders is a lot more puzzling than anything John Stossel could uncover. </p>
<p>PS One additional fact that was not mentioned in the comparison between the New Jersey and the school in Belgium is that the Belgian school was a school specializing in preparing ... student-athletes and that it was located in a small town and not a tony suburb. What was clearly mentioned in the original report was that school choice was directly responsible for maintaining or raising the level of the European school. Here's a quotation:</p>
<p>
[quote]
American schools don't teach as well as schools in other countries because they are government monopolies, and monopolies don't have much incentive to compete. In Belgium, by contrast, the money is attached to the kids it's a kind of voucher system. Government funds education at many different kinds of schools but if a school can't attract students, it goes out of business. </p>
<p>Belgian school principal Kaat Vandensavel told us she works hard to impress parents. </p>
<p>She told us, "If we don't offer them what they want for their child, they won't come to our school." She constantly improves the teaching, saying, "You can't afford 10 teachers out of 160 that don't do their work, because the clients will know, and won't come to you again."
[/quote]
</p>
<p>When did you hear this sentence at YOUR SCHOOL from an unionized teacher, "We work hard to impress parents." ?</p>
<p><<< Good teachers should rightfully be annoyed by reports such as Stossel's. >>>></p>
<p>Not true!!!! Good (great) teachers (like my 3 sisters-in-laws) applaud John Stossel. They want the bad teachers expunged. They want lazy teachers fired. They don't like the way unions protect bad teachers. Good doctors aren't upset when bad medical treatments are exposed and neither are good teachers upset when bad teaching is exposed.</p>
<p>Xig: I know that the rest of the paragraph makes a point and I agree with you. I just didn't agree with the statement that "good teachers should RIGHTFULLY be annoyed by reports such as Stossel's." Rightfully, they applaud Stossel's work. Good teachers can't get their unions to do the right thing. Good teachers know that reform needs to be forced from outside by overcoming the stranglehold that the unions hold on public education and on many elected officials. Teachers that try to speak out on their own against the "status quo" are punished.</p>
<p>Ah, John Stossel style "journalism"
-first: find a problem (that's not hard at all)
-second: find a way to blame the problem on government inefficiency/bureaucracy (not so hard either, bureaucracy can often be part of the problem)
-third: find one example where a possible solution to the problem has been implemented and find a way to present it so that this solution appears to be based free-market economics.</p>
<p>Ignoring Stossel, I am still looking for an answer to the following question:</p>
<p>
[quote]
I still haven't seen an explanation on why the European students scored higher than the American students.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Do you have a theory or reason for why this happened? An ad hominem attack on Stossel does not help answer the question raised by the results of the tests.</p>
<p>Eagle79, many explanations have been offered in past discussions, and I added one in this precise thread. Please see the words of Kaat Vandesavel and the unmistakable references to school choices and competition among "public schools." Further, her comment regarding the difficulty of having 10 out 160 teachers NOT doing their job should be quite instructive. Would we like to compare the teachers performance -or mere presence- at the Belgian school and, say, New York, a city where the absenteeism of teachers is rampant and where the union was adamant about the RIGHT to REFUSE to meet with parents outside their allocated classroom time. Comapre that to the comment of Mrs. Vandesavel about working hard to please parents!</p>
<p>It is obvious that teachers and unions are not the SOLE culprits for the abysmal state of our HS, but their role and a lazy and aloof school administration provides a lethal combination of ineptitude and mismanagement. Eliminating abject political characters such as Randi Weingarten from the education debate should be a huge step in the right direction. It is a shame that parents and students cannot ignore her actions in the same way as she ignores them. We know what she and her union stand for, and it surely is not education.</p>
<p>I understood your explanation. Though I did say I haven't seen "an" explanation. I should have said that I haven't seen "your" explanation. I do ask Blobof that later in my post.</p>
<p>His post was an ad hominam response without actually answering the real question raised by the story. John Stossel is not the story. I was asking if there was anything more behind his statement that actually addressed the issue.</p>
<p>I am hoping that he will respond and enlighten us all.</p>
<p>Eagle79, why do you want my explanation in particular? I'll grant you my original post was somewhat of an ad hominem (though the description of Stossel's techniques is quite accurate, it is also certainly aggressive). Anyway</a>, here's part of the explanation of why those New Jersey kids didn't do as well as those in Belgium. Of course, I could go on and study the specifics of the US education system deeper, and look at the Belgian situation in details, then make a thorough diagnostic of the anectodal discrepancy highlighted in John Stossel's program. But, as in my original post, don't try to look for a single cause (or scapegoat) or an apparently simple solution based on embracing a specific economic/political ideology.</p>