Project Wonderful Banner

Wednesday, April 27, 2011

That damned Law

What's Mallard raving about today?


The sad thing about the law is that "merit" is defined in large part by students test scores. Because nothing says "good teacher" quite like slavishly training students to take a standardized test.

Does anyone recall what happened the last time a paragon of Republican ideology made reforms which led to skyrocketing test scores?

What could possibly go wrong this time?


deepbeep said...

I know nothing about this law -- I live in California -- but I'm skeptical of the claim that they merely want to "keep effective teachers and fire ineffective ones."

dlauthor said...

So Evil Teacher looks just like Evil News Executive from last week -- you know, the one who didn't want to rehire Mallard and end the epic unemployment saga. Just a slightly different nose.

Looking at both of them, I have to wonder how long Tinshley's envisioned Bruce Vilanch as the embodiment of all that is wrong with the world.

Which ... well, I'm not sure I can totally disagree with that, but still, interesting insight into the psyche that lurks beneath all the scotch and bile.

Kip W said...

This is one of those Gop Newspeak things, where the name of the law is the Benevolent Useful Standards of
Teaching Unrestrainedly Natural Insightful Original Normal Subjects act, and anybody who sees anything in that but a wholesome commonsense effort to make kids smarter at no extra cost is a crazy alarmist.

Rootbeer said...

Why is Mr. Jewsworthy's -- boss? co-worker? -- from WFDR now sporting the latest in pastel NEA vest/blouse fashion?

I'd imagine other public service unions -- like police officers and firefighters -- have similar LIFO layoff clauses in their contracts. Why are teachers singled out?

Bill the Splut said...

Bruce, you'd better hope that the Reverend Moon doesn't start firing based on lack of merit!

BTW, Tinny, Dunning-Kruger much?

rewinn said...

Unless you use objective standards such as seniority, those rated "best performers" will always be those who "kiss up" to their bosses. There are just too many ways that even well-meaning bosses can favor those who they like.

And ordinary bosses - the ones that aren't saints - will naturally favor the ones who are attractive and compliant to them, or who at the least don't question the boss. These qualities are not good for educating kids, but it will help the favored teachers get the classes that are easier to teach, and therefore easier to teach-to-the-test on.

CasualBrowser said...

Interesting you should make that point, rewinn. In the early eighties, our local school system experimented with merit pay at one school. The result was an increase in brown-nosing to the principal (he determined who had merit), wich took time away from striving for exellence. This caused a decrease in education quality. To improve our school systems nationwide, we'll have to invest time, money, effort and imagination, all on a nationwide scale. Maybe we should emulate successful educational systems (i.e. copy Finland) and consider ideas now considered radical. In any case, improving our childeren's/country's future requires us to INVEST rather than regress. Ask anyone on Wall Street how big profits you'll reep when removing capitol from your portfolio.

Tog said...


Seriously, Bruce Tinsley on education? This wet jackass thinks fractions are a liberal conspiracy.

In other news: the box-office crash-and-burn of Atlas Shrugged Pt 1 has the director all butthurt and threatening to "go Galt" on us.

Do it, asshole. You'll find out who's really "disposable."

Do it without the blowing-things-up part, that is. Rand's "Going Galt" nonsense is worse than "I'm taking my ball and going home;" her characters' tantrums result in buildings blown up, oil fields set ablaze, and trains--filled with passengers--deliberately derailed, all because the obscenely-wealthy aren't getting their "due."

But this is just a no-budget film director, so I guess he'd set fire to a camera, or his clapboard. Eh. On second thought, go nuts.

DiR said...

Why does he assume that newer teachers are automatically better then older ones? Because that's exactly what he is saying.
Or, to extrapolate, the quality of work performed is directly inverse to the length of time one has been doing it.
Say, how long has MF been running?

CW in LA said...

This is pretty unintentionally funny coming from lazy incompetent with the singular job security of a wingnut welfare sinecure.

Or, to put it in non-elitist terms: Fuck off, Tinsh; you SUCK.

Kip W said...

But wait! On Thursday, the Duck reports that the lurker-teachers support him in email! They don't mind the B.U.S.T.U.N.I.O.N.S. act at all! They say so!

And here I'd've expected them to write and tell him his penmanship sucks.

Marion Delgado said...

Here in Eugene we have a Scott Walker-style astroturf group called "Citizens for Jobs and Schools" protesting taxes to pay for school shortfalls. They have a bunch of professionally printed signs and are soliciting people for "Sign Waiving[sic]." Which tells you all you need to know about the outcome of their preferred sort of school, and what they think of the people they'll recruit.