New Ontario Government 2018

[Brad Sallows]

>None of which is particularly relevant to the situation of the teachers.

It's highly relevant to what I'm addressing, which is: "The majority of society believe teachers have it made in this province.".

As to most of the "what is the reason for..." questions: ultimately, money.  Small shifts in the number of teachers per classroom, number of specialists, etc multiply into large numbers across a province.

Arguments that "X amounts to being a pay cut" don't sound well among people who are getting less than "X".

It all comes down to finite dollars and the balance of political support (government, attempting to contain spending growth or spend on different things; employees, attempting to bargain for more money for less work).

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Someone close to me is a school secretary, and says there are no cuts that she can see, and she does the paperwork for the school. To her this is a pure bunfight between the Govt. and the Teachers Unions [not the teachers] over who really runs this Province.

 

[Brad Sallows]

>What would be the impact of a more than 25% increase in class sizes?

All the hand-wringing over class sizes is small beer compared to the impact of "mainstreaming" highly disturbed children.  If kids are paying a "learning tax", that's the standout cause.

 

[mariomike]

To her this is a pure bunfight between the Govt. and the Teachers Unions [not the teachers] over who really runs this Province.

The teachers, as in any union, vote for their leaders. The teachers also voted in favour of strike action,

Ontario public elementary teachers vote 98% in favour of strike action
https://www.google.com/search?sxsrf=ALeKk00GfNgF-UlRCSUvdLj3JsxKwPHJ3w%3A1582481253560&ei=Zb9SXs7hIYGIggfZ5qWADg&q=ontario+teachers+strike+%2298+per+cent%22&oq=ontario+teachers+strike+%2298+per+cent%22&gs_l=psy-ab.12...0.0..1963...0.0..0.0.0.......0......gws-wiz.vlbiBWdjSXY&ved=0ahUKEwiOqO2HoujnAhUBhOAKHVlzCeAQ4dUDCAo#spf=1582481423900

 

[brihard]

>None of which is particularly relevant to the situation of the teachers.

It's highly relevant to what I'm addressing, which is: "The majority of society believe teachers have it made in this province.".

As to most of the "what is the reason for..." questions: ultimately, money.  Small shifts in the number of teachers per classroom, number of specialists, etc multiply into large numbers across a province.

Arguments that "X amounts to being a pay cut" don't sound well among people who are getting less than "X".

It all comes down to finite dollars and the balance of political support (government, attempting to contain spending growth or spend on different things; employees, attempting to bargain for more money for less work).

Yes, you'd neatly distilled the issue to its essence: Ford's government is trying to save money off the backs of teachers and of schoolkids. They're trying to eliminate teachers' jobs by increasing class sizes dramatically, letting inflation contract their pay, and shifting more classes to E-learning. The teachers see more work on them, for less effective pay year over year, and they have seen and called out a number of ways in which this will disadvantage students. If class sizes didn't matter, private schools wouldn't trumpet their small class sizes as an indicator of quality. It's an absolute no brainer that 26 or 28 kids is harder to handle than 22. Anyone with any experience with kids will grasp this intuitively.

While I disagree with your dimunition of the impact of class size increases, absolutely there are other systemic issues to be dealt with in terms of how kids with behavioural challenges are integrated into the classroom. Yes there is disruption there, yes there are problems there. This is why educational assistants for special education programs are also in play here and also protesting, but the government would much rather focus on the much more highly compensated teachers.

With that said, you quoted my question and didn't address it. Are you contending that a 27% growth in class sizes is not a big deal, and will not likely cause a significant decrease in the quality of teaching kids in those classes receive?
>What would be the impact of a more than 25% increase in class sizes?

All the hand-wringing over class sizes is small beer compared to the impact of "mainstreaming" highly disturbed children.  If kids are paying a "learning tax", that's the standout cause.

 

[Brad Sallows]

>With that said, you quoted my question and didn't address it. Are you contending that a 27% growth in class sizes is not a big deal, and will not likely cause a significant decrease in the quality of teaching kids in those classes receive?

It depends on where the class size is. If the reasonable range is 22-28 and the sizes are currently at the low end, a one-quarter increase that still falls in or at the high end of the range is nothing to fear.  Most students, and most subjects, don't require a lot of one-to-one and are adequately well-served by "desk time".  Adding one high-needs kid to a class is much more impactful.  But that's a matter properly dealt with by the principal, not by contract language.  Fixing limits in contracts eliminates class size and composition flexibility.  At the margins, some kids may have to move schools (away from friends).  What's the impact of that?  Some schools may have to add portable classrooms (which I always found a little less comfortable in the winter).  What's the impact of that?  Some (secondary) schools will have to eliminate electives to redirect teachers to larger numbers of core subjects.  What's the impact of that?

>Ford's government is trying to save money off the backs of teachers and of schoolkids.

That's one perspective.  Here's another: teachers are trying to make money off the backs of everyone else who depends on provincial governments for services: health, welfare, etc.

 

[YZT580]

I agree.  Smaller classes would be great so would all the other stuff but no one has answered the question as to how we pay for it.  Health care costs have sky rocketed because our population is ageing.  It costs a lot of money to pave one kilometer of highway and our climate means that we have hundreds to re-do every year.  Immigration means more cars, more commuters, more schools, more pavement, more money. Who pays for it.  The Wynn government bought off the teachers for 8 years in order to gain their support.  We can't afford them anymore.  To pay for smaller classes you need more teachers and more buildings.  The only way to get those is to cut costs elsewhere.  So teachers, I've said it before, if you will accept a 2% cut in pay, we can give you those smaller class sizes.  Your move.

 

[brihard]

I agree.  Smaller classes would be great so would all the other stuff but no one has answered the question as to how we pay for it.  Health care costs have sky rocketed because our population is ageing.  It costs a lot of money to pave one kilometer of highway and our climate means that we have hundreds to re-do every year.  Immigration means more cars, more commuters, more schools, more pavement, more money. Who pays for it.  The Wynn government bought off the teachers for 8 years in order to gain their support.  We can't afford them anymore.  To pay for smaller classes you need more teachers and more buildings.  The only way to get those is to cut costs elsewhere.  So teachers, I've said it before, if you will accept a 2% cut in pay, we can give you those smaller class sizes.  Your move.

They aren't asking for smaller class sizes. They're asking to keep the class sizes they have now. They're asking to keep the 'in class' classes (vs e learning) that they have now. They're asking to keep the same pay adjusted for inflation that they have now. Teachers are asking for literally nothing new. They just want to status quo, and for things to not get worse.

I do not see an argument being made by the government that they are unable to pay for what currently exists, or that we face economic difficulty. On the contrary, from yesterday:

Inside the convention centre, the party was debating their policies going forward and cheering on accomplishments so far.

“Our economy is firing on all cylinders. Over 307,000 new jobs have been created in Ontario since we took office,” Premier Doug Ford said during his speech to supporters.

https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/lilley-unions-try-to-shout-down-premier-but-ford-keeps-on-truckin

So yeah, to keep this crystal clear: Teachers are asking for things to stay as they are. Not any improvement, not any effective increase in salary beyond inflation, not smaller classes than they have now, nothing of the sort. They want conditions in the classroom to not get worse and for their pay and working conditions to not get worse, during a time when our premier is bragging on the state of the provincial economy.

 

[Cloud Cover]

More than anything else, they just want to be seen to be the premiere socialist movement opposing the Ford government. If those things were all they were asking for, there would be no strike.

 

[Brad Sallows]

>So yeah, to keep this crystal clear: Teachers are asking for things to stay as they are.

From where I sit (in BC), ON teachers did really well over the past decade.  I realize they want to keep those gains; I realize that "win" and "tradesies" are part of what unions will talk about, but "lose" is not.  Sometimes gains should be clawed back.

Secondary problem: would anything in the teachers' demands trigger "me-too" clauses if granted?  If the unions are asking for things that would trigger those clauses, it's not as pure-minded as "for the children" and "stay as they are".  When unions plan strategy collectively, they like to concentrate resources in the one or two occupations looked upon most favourably by the public (typically, teachers or nurses).  All the rest settle, reasonably quickly and without draining the war chests, and the focus and funds go to the remaining one or two for the real political fight.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

The teachers, as in any union, vote for their leaders. The teachers also voted in favour of strike action,

You should have paid more attention to your union while you worked.....need a meme for the things I trust more then my Union on elections/vote counting.

 

[BeyondTheNow]

The situation(s) for teachers vary greatly province to province. Teaching environments, student-bodies, unions, extra-curricular involvement and/or availability, salaries, curriculums, etc., ALL have differences,  and sometimes very significant in many areas. It’s entirely unrealistic to compare a single teacher’s career/experience between, say, Scarborough, ON and Victoria BC. Experiences even within a single school board can be night and day.

Poor time management and/or prep has nothing to do with those teachers who volunteer to donate their time so students can get the most out of their education. Sports, arts, trips, etc can only operate through volunteering. There are teachers who are working 10-12hr days.

It’s not right to fault the body of teachers for the fact that Ontario has an abundance of those looking for positions. It’s been like that for well over a decade now. (Many don’t want to relocate elsewhere in the country, or even venture up north). But again, that’s not the fault on all Ontario teachers—that’s a separate issue altogether, which perhaps needs to be evaluated by the universities—perhaps limiting teacher’s colleges acceptance numbers more? But that won’t happen, because they still want their money...

Are there teachers who figured the gig would be an easy, rosey go and just figured they’d get guaranteed weekends, holidays and 6 weeks off in the summers? Yup. At the elementary, secondary AND post-secondary levels. Just like there are those in several other professions who went into things disillusioned and then find themselves miserable. I’m also fairly certain that that isn’t a new phenomenon. I’m confident in saying almost every user on this site had at least a couple of teachers during their schooling who were awful compared to others. To utilize any sort of blanket statement(s) to describe the entire body of teaching in not only Ontario, but country-wide (or inter-provincial) is nothing but counter-productive to everyone, regardless of which side of the fence one is sitting on wrt the current state of affairs.


Many teachers are being very clear on what they feel is necessary in order to keep Ontario’s standards as they are now, and people are entirely against them. Are those same people going to blame the teachers also when our standards slip, when our scores and ratings fall? When there’s no one left to take on the responsibility of helping run outside-classroom events/competitions/any experiences geared towards higher learning? Probably. It seems they can’t win.

Some articles very much worth a gander...

What are this issues in dispute?

...Education funding

At the root of the conflict is the question of how much the Conservative government will spend on the province’s schools. The government has said it wants to trim education spending in order to help balance the provincial budget.

At the same time, Lecce has emphasized that education funding increased this year. The Conservatives have made “the largest investment ever expended in provincial history in public education in the province of Ontario,” Lecce told the legislature in a typical exchange during Question Period.

For months union leaders, backed by some parents and students, have protested government cuts to education, often using the slogan “Cuts hurt kids.”

So is the government increasing spending or cutting it?

The government will spend $29.969 billion on elementary and secondary education this year, according to the most recent economic statement. That’s $1.2 billion more than last year, an increase of 4.3 per cent. However, a good chunk of the increase this year won’t go to schools — it’s for a new child-care tax credit that is included in the education budget. The tax credit will cost an estimated $435 million, says the Financial Accountability Office of Ontario. The government has a lower estimate of $390 million for the tax credit.

Critics argue that current spending amounts to a cut once inflation and rising enrolment are taken into account. The amount the province provides in per-pupil funding has gone down.

Here’s how the Accountability Office crunches the numbers: Over the last five years, education costs have increased an average of 2.2 per cent a year simply due to changing enrolment and inflation, while spending rose an average of 3.3 per cent annually.

Over the next five years, the Conservative government plans to slow spending. The forecast calls for an average funding increase of one per cent a year, but inflation and rising enrolment are expected to accelerate costs by 2.7 per cent annually, says the office.

Lecce points out the government has increased funding in some areas, such as more mental health supports and development of a new “back-to-basics” math curriculum.

Larger classes

Making classes larger is a key part of the government’s goal of reducing education spending. The larger classes announced by the government last spring would eliminate 10,054 teachers, saving $900 million a year when fully implemented, according to the Accountability Office. The ministry has provided funding to boards so positions are lost through attrition.

It’s the issue that probably resonates most strongly with students and parents.

Critics warn that students won’t get as much individual attention, fewer teachers will be available for extracurricular activities, and high school students will have fewer course options.

In Grades 4 to 8, funded class sizes have gone up by about one student, from an average of 23.84 to 24.5 students.

In high schools, school boards were told to increase average class sizes from 22 to 28 over the next four years. Classes have inched up this year to an average of 22.9 students, says the Accountability Office.

Critics say that as the average grows, smaller-enrolment specialty courses will have to be cut while more mainstream academic courses might balloon to 40 students or more. Some boards across the province have cut courses.

Small high schools will find it particularly difficult to offer a range of courses.

The Renfrew Country District School Board, for instance, was forced to cut about 30 courses and blend grades and academic levels into the same classroom at some of its schools this year.

Grade 11 and 12 drama, music and guitar courses were eliminated at one school, while another didn’t offer any physics courses in Grade 11 or 12 and a third school cut French courses in Grades 11 and 12, offering e-learning instead.

Lecce has responded to criticism by saying class sizes are essentially the same this year and he welcomes innovative solutions that would allow the government to find savings elsewhere instead.

Lecce said also said the government is willing to modify the increase, making classes an average of 25 rather than 28. The Ontario Secondary School Teachers’ Federation (OSSTF) said that proposal was coupled with a plan to eliminate all limits on class sizes now contained in local collective agreements.  At the Ottawa-Carleton District School Board, for instance, high school class sizes are limited to no more than 28 for academic courses, 24 for applied level courses and 17 for courses developed for high-needs students.

Lecce says he’s compromising and the government side is reasonable. Critics have lambasted him for making misleading statements that imply the government has proposed making class sizes smaller than they are now. In his latest statement, Lecce said the government was “reducing class room sizes from 28 to 25.”

The OSSTF has proposed that class sizes revert to what they were last year — an average of 22 students.

Mandatory online courses

The government has softened its plan to require high school students to take four of their 30 credits online, announcing on Nov. 21 that two online credits will be required instead. The courses will have an average size of 35 students.

Students who are in Grade 9 next year and graduate in 1923-24 will be the first cohort to be required to take two online courses.

Lecce said the change will give students more choice in courses and ensure they graduate with “with the skills and technical fluency they need in a competitive global labour market.”

Public consultations are planned.

Unions have opposed the plan, saying not all students learn well online, no other North American jurisdiction requires so many online courses in high school, and those in rural areas or poor households might not have their own electronic devices at home or Internet service.

The OSSTF has proposed that online courses continue to be optional, not mandatory, and that the issue be studied by a committee.

Wages

The government has passed legislation limiting wage increases for public servants to no more than one per cent a year for the next three years. That applies to more than 200,000 teachers and other school board employees. Unions say the law interferes with collective bargaining and they may challenge it in court.

Lecce told CBC that he’s confident the law will survive a constitutional challenge. He points out that one union representing education support staff has already accepted the one-per-cent raise. CUPE reached a last-minute deal last month a few hours before a strike that would have closed some schools across the province.

The union representing public high school teachers, OSSTF, is asking for a raise equal to the increase in the cost of living, which is about two per cent. It’s not known what the elementary and Catholic board teachers are seeking because they have not made their proposals public....

Full article:
https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/what-are-the-issues-in-ontario-teacher-dispute

If Doug Ford’s government gets its way, Ontario risks losing its educational edge

As in other provinces and many other countries, provincial laws in Ontario restrict teachers’ legitimate concerns – what they can protest about, or bargain for – to issues of salary, benefits and working conditions. Teachers are expressly prohibited from negotiating on issues of policy (for example, curriculum), even while policies may be serious issues of concern to them.

As a consequence, teacher unions are often criticized for emphasizing such “trivial” or “self-serving” issues seemingly at the expense of student learning. But the notion that the conditions of teaching are also students’ learning conditions is more than just a slogan. Research conducted in Ontario and other jurisdictions has demonstrated that the factors that allow teachers to teach well, and to know it, are the same factors that support student learning.

Rarely have teacher unions been as successful in articulating this connection as they have been in recent days. They are asking for a 2-per-cent salary increase to keep up with inflation (less than the increase that has already been awarded to Ontario’s police), but they’ve also made it clear to much of the public that some of the educational changes put forward by the provincial Progressive Conservative government are likely to compromise the quality of teaching and learning.

Full-day kindergarten has been shown by researchers to improve young students’ social and academic development as they move into the primary grades. Without full-day kindergarten, such gains will be lost.

The requirement that secondary students must take some of their courses online in order to graduate, while yet to be implemented, may not be the optimal pedagogical approach for all of them and may not be readily accessible to all students.

Finally, increases in class size, particularly at the secondary school level, have serious implications for students and teachers. The research base on class size is unclear about what the optimal class size is, or whether it matters more when children are younger, but it is clear that in larger classes, students get less attention and teaching is more teacher-centred and didactic, and students are more likely to get frustrated and disengaged by teachers’ inability to discern how and how much students are learning.

Increasing class sizes also means reducing the number of teachers and other adults who support children in schools – and fewer courses available to students that engage their interests, allow them to graduate with full credits and qualify for entrance into postsecondary schools...

Full article:
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-if-doug-fords-government-gets-its-way-ontario-risks-losing-its/

Teacher working conditions that matter

... To advance our understanding of the issues, the Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario commissioned one of the authors (Ken Leithwood) to do an analytical review of the literature on teachers’ working conditions. This resulted in the publication, Teacher Working Conditions That Matter: Evidence for Change.2 The framework for this report is based on the premises that teachers’ feelings and knowledge (“internal states”) are the immediate “causes” of what teachers do and that many of these internal states are significantly influenced by the circumstances in which they work. Some working conditions will have quite positive effects on one or more of these internal states, whereas some will have negative effects. Teachers’ performance will be influenced accordingly. Evidence points to the influence on teachers’ work and, in some cases, also on student learning, of eight specific internal states:
•Individual sense of professional efficacy; •Collective sense of professional efficacy; •Organizational commitment;
•Job satisfaction;
•Stress and burnout;
•Morale;
•Engagement or disengagement (from the school and/or
profession); and
•Pedagogical content knowledge.
The analysis identifies working conditions which evidence suggests have a significant influence on each of these inter- nal states...

Full article:
https://www.edcan.ca/wp-content/uploads/EdCan-2007-v47-n2-Leithwood.pdf

 

[Brad Sallows]

>There are teachers who are working 10-12hr days.

How many, and how often?  Is that claim meant to suggest that teachers are like associates in high-pressure corporate litigation firms?

 

[Jarnhamar]

The larger classes announced by the government last spring would eliminate 10,054 teachers, saving $900 million a year when fully implemented

Maybe it's semantics or maybe it's not even accurate but I read the government wasn't planning on firing 10,000 teachers. They weren't hiring as many replacements ones the others leave, leaving us 10,000 less positions.

 

[Remius]

I'm pretty much annoyed by both sides of this.  I also do not have any kids in the Ontario system.  Mine is in private school. My mother was a teacher and even back then they faced all sorts of challenges (she taught at a school with a reputation for having tough students).

But a few things come to mind.

1) Teacher seniority is an issue the union does not what to drop.  Seniority should not be the basis of hiring or getting plum spots,  Merit should be.  Teachers should drop that but I doubt the union will.

2) If funding is an issue then drop expensive programs like French immersion.  If you want your kids to be bilingual send them to French school.  French immersion causes the system to be unbalanced and creates schools where most students don't need as much one on one and others (the non-immersion ones) with high concentrations of students who need more attention.  But it brings in students and that translates to money for boards.  Take those funds and reinvest in programs for students with special needs. 

3) Integration needs to go.  Integrating special needs students was a dumb idea and is likely contributing to teacher burnout.  Recruit more specialised teachers for that and redirect more ECEs to those classes.

4) I have no issues with teachers asking for more money even if it was more than the rate of inflation.  That's what collective bargaining is for.

5) There are some crappy teachers out there and virtually not mechanism to get rid of them.  Principals need to have the power to fire some of them.  The union will never go for that though.

All things considered, Doug Ford is losing the PR war but only just barely.  Teachers are on thin ice with parents.  While I think most do support them, that might change if they don't see any willingness to compromise. 

 

[mariomike]

Teacher seniority is an issue the union does not what to drop. 

From what I remember of this discussion, I doubt any unions want to drop seniority rights,

Public Sector Unions 
https://army.ca/forums/threads/98623.0.html
3 pages.
Locked.

 

[Remius]

The problem is that seniority rule they have (which the Liberals gave them) applies to the hiring of teachers.  Meaning they have to hire someone with more seniority than someone who might actually be more qualified and deserving.  It keeps younger teachers on supply lists.

The government claims that it could lead to a very experienced history teacher being hired over a more qualified math teacher but the history teacher might be hired to teach Math.  I can't confirm if that has happened or not but I can see the issue.  It's one thing to have seniority when you are in the workplace but the hiring process is something else.

Where I work my seniority is rewarded with pay, longer leave entitlement etc.  But if I apply for another position, it plays no role other than the fact that I might have gained some experience but if I am a crappy candidate or a better candidate with less time in but is a better choice, then that is what counts.  Just because someone spends 20 years in a position does not mean they should automatically get the job.

 

[Eaglelord17]

None of which is particularly relevant to the situation of the teachers. The things you describe are matters for those workers to hash out with their own employers. They may want to consider unionizing if they have been unable to protect their rights and employment conditions without them.

That statement is a joke. On one hand you have the private sector which is thanks to the global economy required to be competitive not just in Canada but the rest of the world, meaning it is very difficult to achieve any sort of pay raise as the company could just close doors and go elsewhere. The other hand you have a closed market not driven by profits, which if there is ever a financial issue they can just force the government to pay more money, made by levying the private sector. The same private sector which is not getting pay raises anywhere near the same amount, so not only is their value going down through inflation it is also going down due to the taxes levied to pay for the ever increasing public sector salaries. Every pay raise a teacher or any other public sector employee makes, provided there hasn't been cuts elsewhere in the government, is made off the backs of the rest of us. Why should Teachers or any other government employee be entitled to more than what everyone else is getting?

Personally I feel no sympathy for teachers (my mom was one, and she worked with the worst of the students as that's where she specialized), they are exceptionally well paid for what they do, excellent benefits, and a gold standard pension. Much of the time at the high school level they are putting in roughly 40 hours a week (sometimes a bit more, but also sometimes a bit less), and when you break down their wage by the hour they are getting paid roughly 55$ a hour worked with a third of the year off at all the prime times. Coupled with the fact most of these people couldn't find another job anywhere else above minimum due to the fact their 'skills' are flooded in our market. Not much demand for English, history, or arts degrees in our society, ask most of the graduates of those programs who got pushed towards them by teachers. Teaching itself isn't that hard a skill to have, if we can train a bunch of people in the military to do so effectively, clearly it isn't some mystic skill like teachers pretend it is. A teachers degree doesn't mean someone is effective at it, the same way a drivers licence doesn't mean someone is good at driving.

I disagree with the online classes, I think they are absolute garbage, much like the militaries online training. I also don't think it should be the teachers union fighting that, as far as I am concerned their job is to teach, not to tell the government how or what to teach. If you don't like it quit and find another job.

For high school class sizes, I think 28 is reasonable. Studies have shown there is no really difference in the quality of education for highschool students at 22 or 28. Studies have shown that class sizes make a huge difference in Elementary school, which is why I am against increasing the size there. People are also forgetting in 4 years most are on to college or university and if they can't handle 28 students they are in for a world of hurt when they have 200+ to a classroom.

For pay raises, I personally think all the public service in Ontario (not just teachers) needs a hair cut, especially the MPPs, and its disgusting how Ford is attacking one part of public sector and increasing his own wage at the same time. Personally I think a solution to this is to have a fixed base rate off a multiplier of average income in a province or the country, it adjusts automatically depending on how everyone else is doing. ex. If teachers got paid 1.5 times the average Ontarian income, there would be no debates on wages, it would have automatic increases AND decreases, and it would be a fair way to ensure the balance between Public and Private doesn't grow too wide (like it is at the moment). There would also be no strikes due to wages and it would really allow the Union and government to focus on what their priorities should be, working conditions.

One thing I think that could save a lot of money is to amalgamate the school boards. There is no reason to have 4 different publicly funded school boards, likely tons of redundancies in management could be made and a lot of money saved there alone.

Ultimately the teachers brought this upon themselves. They chose to become political through there union, interfere in the political process, and are shocked when the side they companied against won. it doesn't mean I like Ford or agree with his policies, but I recognize how ridiculous it is for someone to say their employer is garbage, side against them, then expect to be treated well. In the private sector, I would likely lose my job if I talked about my employer the way many of the teachers I know do. This is exactly why I don't think public unions should be allowed to pick sides in elections as it is essentially campaigning against your employer and really does kill any attempt at impartiality (which should be the governing principle for all public service jobs).

 

[Remius]

Teaching itself isn't that hard a skill to have, if we can train a bunch of people in the military to do so effectively, clearly it isn't some mystic skill like teachers pretend it is. A teachers degree doesn't mean someone is effective at it, the same way a drivers licence doesn't mean someone is good at driving.

I'm going to take you to task on this.

We don't train the military to be teachers.  They become instructors.  Not the same thing.  Also the military training system literally spoon feeds a course its content and supplies to its instructors. it's very cookie cutter.  Dealing with a class of military types is very different than dealing with kids.  Military instructors have the CoC and the NDA behind them to get their jobs done.  What do you think a teacher can do if an 8 year old takes a swipe at them? 

Let's stop comparing apples and oranges here.  An A PLQ/IJLC with a mod on instructing does not equate to a degree in education.

You bring up some good points, that one is not one of them.

 

[Eaglelord17]

I'm going to take you to task on this.

We don't train the military to be teachers.  They become instructors.  Not the same thing.  Also the military training system literally spoon feeds a course its content and supplies to its instructors. it's very cookie cutter.  Dealing with a class of military types is very different than dealing with kids.  Military instructors have the CoC and the NDA behind them to get their jobs done.  What do you think a teacher can do if an 8 year old takes a swipe at them? 

Let's stop comparing apples and oranges here.  An A PLQ/IJLC with a mod on instructing does not equate to a degree in education.

You bring up some good points, that one is not one of them.

Fair enough, however a teaching degree also doesn't mean someone is competent to teach. Personally I am in the skilled trades. My teachers are the tradesmen around me. Some of them I doubt have highschool yet they are some of the best teachers I have ever had. Others though aren't particularly good at teaching despite being excellent at what they do. Same thing applies to teachers themselves. They might be very knowledgeable on a subject, that doesn't mean they are good at transferring the information.