Nas wrote:
The Missing Link wrote:
Nas wrote:
MANY teachers don't like guidance..
They definitely don't like taking direction from people that have never did the work. Which is one of the problems with the CEO/LSC model that is currently in place. Teachers will take direction from people that actually know what they are talking about or at least that has been my experience anyway.
Some teachers don't want guidance that makes them uncomfortable in any way. It doesn't matter if the principal has classroom experience or not. When it comes to the hiring process, you know network chiefs place their thumbs on the scale and paper LSCs fall in line. In other cases, an LSC doesn't exist.
I think giving vested members of the community a voice is important. Far to often, administrators run schools like a dictator. With very little oversight from network chiefs.
Education is like most professions in this respect. You have to have seen people actually do the work. In most cases you haven't and deferring to people simply because of their job titles is a rather flawed premise and one that has failed MANY a school.
And just because someone is an administrator does not mean that they are a good administrator. Actually most aren't these days as MANY of the people that would be good at it don't really want the job.
When I first started in CPS you had really good, experienced people running schools. People that I was more than happy to take direction from in most cases. That no longer is the case. In most cases these days what you have are "straight to video" Admin types that have spent very little time in the classroom and select to run to Administration to A. Get out of the Classroom as fast as they can because they hate teaching and B. Get out of the classroom as fast as they can so that they can make more money.
On the flip side of that are a ton of veteran teachers that would be great at Administration but don't want to transition out of their "cushy" teaching spot because A. Outside of principal any other position in Administration would be a pay cut and B. There is no protection for you if the principal gets whacked. You go if they go in most cases. With this being the case why do it at all?
So in today's arena what you have in their stead are people that don't know shit who expect you to defer to them simply because of their position and job title. For the most part that shit has been a terrible mistake as it might cost you your entire career if you "defer" wrong. I have seen it happen in too many instances to just believe otherwise.
In the case of LSCs there are many which place their interests ahead of the schools which they are supposed to be manning in a lot of cases. By that I mean they don't care as much about hiring the "best candidate" as much as they care about hiring the person that they can control or "feel most comfortable working with". It's a running joke as to how principals and those who look to be principal have stacked the deck on LSCs with "their people" so that they will receive little to no oversight from the LSC. In return for said favor, the principal is expected to rubber stamp any and everything which the LSCs tells it to rubber stamp. Usually in the form of enrollment for one of their kids or friends kids and people that they want hired for jobs.
_________________
pittmike wrote:
Technically I was drunk (big surprise) and asked her if she liked a tongue up her ass.
Frank Coztansa wrote:
Again, your comprehension needs work.