Michigan Votes Forum

Discuss issues, ideas and legislation related to the Great Lake State.
Welcome to Michigan Votes Forum Sign in | Join | Help
in Search
Latest post 09-28-2012 9:50 AM by TaterSalad. 8 replies.
Page 1 of 1 (9 items)
Sort Posts: Previous Next
  • 01-01-2001 12:00 AM

    2011 House Bill 4627 (Ban laying off more effective but less senior teachers first (“LIFO”) )

    Introduced in the House on May 10, 2011

    Click here to view bill details.
  • 05-12-2011 9:03 AM In reply to

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4627 (Ban laying off more effective but less senior teachers first (“LIFO”) )

    This, and the other bills regarding the tenure law, would work if teachers were able to select their raw materials, business-style.  Unfortunately, teachers take what they get, including, but not limited to, the full range of Special Education students (blind, hearing impaired, physically impaired, autistic, emotional impairment, learning disability, cognitive impairment -- those with I.Q. scores from 0-70 -- and multiple impairments -- low cognition combined with a severe physical impairment), students from abusive homes, homeless, drug houses, and so forth.  Respectfully, before dictating a teacher's performance, each and every legislator must put on those shoes take them out for a test-run.  The day-to-day work of the education system is NOT a business!

  • 05-12-2011 9:46 AM In reply to

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4627 (Ban laying off more effective but less senior teachers first (“LIFO”) )

    lilstoetz:
    would work if teachers were able to select their raw materials, business-style.

    Seems like the wrong analogy to me.  Students are more analogous to customers than raw materials.  Businesses don't choose their customers.  Some of them are wonderful to work with and easy to please, while others are a pain in the ass but are still customers.  Successful businesses manage to satisfy the majority of their customers.  Certainly the type of students a teacher has to deal with comes into consideration but just because the teacher has some difficult students it should not be an excuse for poor performance. 

    Let's face it, there are many good teachers out there and there are certainly some bad ones.  I have children in the public school system and I have seen both.  It still baffles me why any good teachers would want to protect the bad teachers but it happens all the time.  We need to hold teachers accountable for their performance and get rid of poor performers.

     

  • 05-18-2011 7:26 PM In reply to

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4627 (Ban laying off more effective but less senior teachers first (“LIFO”) )

    Bad teachers are not protected by good teachers.  Bad teachers are protected by bad administrators who recommend them for tenure or give them good evaluations in the first place.  Administrators in many schools need to grow a spine and fire the bad teachers in their first few years of working - who cares if that bad teacher is "cousin Tom's step-son" who once taught your kid how to play catch.  Who cares if that "bad teacher" is a pretty good coach.  Stop giving them good evaluations and protecting their job!  Tenure is not the problem because a bad teacher can be fired for ANY reason in their first 5 years.  A really good teacher does not suddenly become a bad teacher just because they have earned tenure - they were that way from the very beginning.

  • 09-26-2011 7:29 PM In reply to

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4627 (Ban laying off more effective but less senior teachers first (“LIFO”) )

    I have a lot of respect when I see content by other people who are definitely more of an expert in comparison with me on this subject matter. The audience might think the idea looks effortless, there is however so much going on behind the curtain. Your work is a result of research and knowledge on your part and you were very good enough to share all with people like me. Appreciate it.

     

    Stephan storage Kitchener

  • 11-30-2011 1:06 PM In reply to

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4627 (Ban laying off more effective but less senior teachers first (“LIFO”) )

    Another ban that is now being considered:

     

    Coming down the pike:

     

    This future legislation by the Democrats will be introduced soon and needs to be exposed to the citizens of Michigan:

     

    State Sen. Rebekah Warren, D-Ann Arbor, is planning to introduce a constitutional amendment banning for-profit schools in Michigan.

    Details of the proposal aren’t yet known, but Warren issued a media advisory today indicating she plans to make the announcement during a news conference at 9:30 a.m. Tuesday in Rooms 402 and 403 of the Michigan State Capitol Building in Lansing.

    “In October, Republicans pushed legislation that would remove Michigan’s cap on charter schools, essentially opening the doors to for-profit schools and increased privatization of teachers and school workers,” the advisory states. “This constitutional amendment aims to protect our children’s education from being compromised at the expense of corporate profits”…

     

  • 09-15-2012 11:40 AM In reply to

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4627 (Ban laying off more effective but less senior teachers first (“LIFO”) )

    I cannot understand how they can lay off these teachers at all. These teachers are so important here and need to stay. I am not sure what they are thinking here. http://www.squidoo**.*com/steel-buildings-info
  • 09-15-2012 7:59 PM In reply to

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4627 (Ban laying off more effective but less senior teachers first (“LIFO”) )

    Get over it! Tenure is the problem and everyone knows it but won't admit it. Bad teachers are bad and can not teach but continue to teach and get all the benefits paid for by the taxpayer. Good teachers take the rap for the bad ones who could careless. It is time to change this and to give the power to the administrators, not the unions to can these bad apples. Make Michigan a "Right to Work State" and all the problems are eliminated and competition will begin.

     

  • 09-28-2012 9:50 AM In reply to

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4627 (Ban laying off more effective but less senior teachers first (“LIFO”) )

    Your public unions and how they protect bad teachers: Five times caught being drunk on the job and three times caught with drugs and then a teacher can be fired. In the private sector, this is not tolerated. When it comes with "your" tax money to support these drunk and drugged teachers, it seems that education expenses sure is "going a long way" down a dead end street. The Unions answer is to blame the money (not enough) spent on the kids education and to raise taxes on the citizens to "correct the conditions". http://www.michigancapitolconfidential**.*com/17596

     

Page 1 of 1 (9 items)
Powered by Community Server (Commercial Edition), by Telligent Systems