The I Support BC Teachers thread

[nuckin_futz]

Not a real tweet but made me chuckle.

[Heretic]

[RUPERTKBD]

Not a real tweet but made me chuckle.

About as funny as your earlier photoshopped pic. That is, not very.

Your argument actually loses credibility when you post things like this. Look at all of the posters in this thread posting articles where they say the Clark government is being dishonest and ask yourself if this sort of thing helps or hurts.

[Warhippy]

About as funny as your earlier photoshopped pic. That is, not very.

Your argument actually loses credibility when you post things like this. Look at all of the posters in this thread posting articles where they say the Clark government is being dishonest and ask yourself if this sort of thing helps or hurts.

In comparison to all the posts pointing out where she is hones....oh ya, there are none

[aGENT]

In comparison to all the posts pointing out where she is hones....oh ya, there are none

I think you missed his point.

[RUPERTKBD]

In comparison to all the posts pointing out where she is hones....oh ya, there are none

See, this is what I'm talking about. I'm on the teachers' side, but when I come in to discuss the actual situation, I have to slog through pages of silly "jokes" and rhetoric that reminds us what an evil person Clark is.

I suppose it's apropos that this thread is about quality of education (or lack thereof) because at times it resembles a Kindergarten class.

[Warhippy]

I think you missed his point.

No JR I didn't.

I have seen that same nonsense posted everywhere and anyone with half a brain knows it is fake. How it removes credibility from the actual cause so many are fighting for right now though when shown in direct comparison to the lies and misinformation being told and spread via OUR tax dollars is beyond me.

Remember, nobody has called Clark honest in this thread.

[RUPERTKBD]

I think you missed his point.

About as badly as the Canucks missed the net last season...

[Warhippy]

See, this is what I'm talking about. I'm on the teachers' side, but when I come in to discuss the actual situation, I have to slog through pages of silly "jokes" and rhetoric that reminds us what an evil person Clark is.

I suppose it's apropos that this thread is about quality of education (or lack thereof) because at times it resembles a Kindergarten class.

Again, at no point in time has anyone called Clark or the Liberals honest. It is harder and harder to stand back and attempt to be objective about a situation they themselves by all accounts have engendered and brought in to play.

I am not by any measure saying Clark is an evil person, her actions speak louder than my words ever could.

But when speaking of credibility and honesty, you have to draw the comparison between the two parties and only one has consistently lied to the population

[RUPERTKBD]

It is harder and harder to stand back and attempt to be objective about a situation

If you find it that hard to be objective, I don't think you're really trying.

My earlier post had nothing to do about Christy Clark's honesty. I brought it up merely because so many others in the thread had disparaged it.

What I'm talking about is taking an adult topic and reducing to childish little photos that look like they were created by nine year olds. I understend how much everybody hates CC, but resorting to fake pics is as weak as an argument gets. You have plenty of ammo without sinking to a 3rd grade level.

[Warhippy]

If you find it that hard to be objective, I don't think you're really trying.

My earlier post had nothing to do about Christy Clark's honesty. I brought it up merely because so many others in the thread had disparaged it.

What I'm talking about is taking an adult topic and reducing to childish little photos that look like they were created by nine year olds. I understend how much everybody hates CC, but resorting to fake pics is as weak as an argument gets. You have plenty of ammo without sinking to a 3rd grade level.

Not arguing with that at all

But credibility and honesty are the root causes of all of this. The problem is one party isn't bargaining with any of those yet pretends to.

All the while I have 2 kids at home while we hear nonsense like "the teachers need to come back to the realms of affordability" or "I understand what you are going through"

All this while everyone knows she has refused to sit down and meet with the BCTF at all over the summer and is using her PR to claim the opposite.

The kids are hurting right now, but the only thing hurting more is her campaign of dishonesty

[RUPERTKBD]

Not arguing with that at all

But credibility and honesty are the root causes of all of this. The problem is one party isn't bargaining with any of those yet pretends to.

All the while I have 2 kids at home while we hear nonsense like "the teachers need to come back to the realms of affordability" or "I understand what you are going through"

All this while everyone knows she has refused to sit down and meet with the BCTF at all over the summer and is using her PR to claim the opposite.

The kids are hurting right now, but the only thing hurting more is her campaign of dishonesty

And I've never argued against that.

In regards to your first sentence, if we agree about skipping the kiddie pics, I have to wonder why you felt the need to comment on my original post, since it was directly solely at another poster who was making his second foray into the fake Christy posts.

[Heretic]

Just to show that I'm all about resolution, read this in the Province today:

Michael Smyth

"On the crucial issue of class size and composition, for example, the government proposes a $75-million-ayear “Learning Improvement Fund” to hire additional teachers, education assistants and other resources.

The union — saying the government is trying to escape the court judgment — has countered with a $225-million-a-year “Workload Fund” to be co-managed by the union and used “exclusively for the hiring of additional teachers.”

In other words, the Workload Fund would be used only to hire new members of the BCTF, because education assistants are represented by a different union.

Keep in mind education assistants work directly with special-needs students, and they make a lot less money than teachers.

So if this dispute is really “all about the kids” as the BCTF says, why would they oppose spending more money on the education assistants who work with the most vulnerable kids of all?

And because they work cheaper than teachers, you could hire more EAs to boot, increasing the bang for the buck spent on special-needs kids."

So, if that's really true (them wanting to use the funds just for new teachers), then it's something the union needs to budge on as myself and my wife (as you know she's a TOC) are against that and that the funds should be used as needed - that is, some for new teachers, some for EA, and some for tools.

[23Gradin]

Just to show that I'm all about resolution, read this in the Province today:

Michael Smyth

"On the crucial issue of class size and composition, for example, the government proposes a $75-million-ayear “Learning Improvement Fund” to hire additional teachers, education assistants and other resources.

The union — saying the government is trying to escape the court judgment — has countered with a $225-million-a-year “Workload Fund” to be co-managed by the union and used “exclusively for the hiring of additional teachers.”

In other words, the Workload Fund would be used only to hire new members of the BCTF, because education assistants are represented by a different union.

Keep in mind education assistants work directly with special-needs students, and they make a lot less money than teachers.

So if this dispute is really “all about the kids” as the BCTF says, why would they oppose spending more money on the education assistants who work with the most vulnerable kids of all?

And because they work cheaper than teachers, you could hire more EAs to boot, increasing the bang for the buck spent on special-needs kids."

So, if that's really true (them wanting to use the funds just for new teachers), then it's something the union needs to budge on as myself and my wife (as you know she's a TOC) are against that and that the funds should be used as needed - that is, some for new teachers, some for EA, and some for tools.

I think the issue with Smyth's article is going to be the fact that while EAs definitely do vital work with students, Smyth oversimplifies the issue as simply student to adult ratio. EAs do not create the lessons or educational programs, the teacher of the specific class does; EAs are indispensable in carrying out and assisting with their assigned special needs student(s), but the planning, prepping, and evaluating is done by the teacher. This becomes more difficult with more IEPs (Individual Education Plan) being required to address the diverse needs that occur more and more now in the classes.

So although well-meaning and cost-saving in intent, increasing the numbers of EAs does very little at actually alleviating the difficulties of high numbers of IEPs in a given class.

[23Gradin]

One aspect among many that I am puzzled about is, with most other disputes, negotiations are able to occur even during job action and even full-on striking; in this case however, the govt is insistent that the strike end before any negotiations are possible. Wouldn't it just make more sense to get to the table regardless and try yo actually negotiate/bargain without this precondition? I may be wrong, but I've never heard of any other strikers who were given such a precondition. (If there are cases like this please sincerely enlighten me as I just can't grasp that part of it)

[23Gradin]

Just to be fair, and I personally do share RUPERTKBD's point about not resorting down to a certain level, there have been many examples of both sides not just the anti-govt side doing this, particularly the shots at Jim Iker's choice of hairstyle, hippy persona, and characterizing teachers as greedy, communist, etc. I agree that regardless of side, once that line is crossed, the credibility is lost, and the argument becomes little more than a cheap joke.

[23Gradin]

I found this to be an interesting read from Janet Steffenhagen:

http://blogs.vancouversun.com/2013/06/09/peter-fassbender-and-the-back-to-basics-education-movement-in-the-70s/?__federated=1

Esp. the parts below:

...Fassbender introduced a motion asking the Education Ministry to restore corporal punishment, the letter says, and seconded a motion to have the Langley board withdraw from the B.C. School Trustees’ Association because it had been “sluggish and lax” for several years. (The board later changes its mind and tried to dominate the association instead.)

In May 1977, after five months of the Basic Bunch (as they were known), “morale had taken such a rapid turn for the worse that LTA officers sought a meeting with senior officials in the ministry of education,” the newsletter states. A meeting was held to discuss “the effect school board actions were having on teacher morale, the board’s refusal to accept a recommendation from the senior staff and what appeared as a vindictive attitude by individual trustees towards teachers.”

I am a believer in people being able to change their views, but when I saw this I was a little concerned whether his perspectives had changed or not.

[Gross-Misconduct]

Not a real tweet but made me chuckle.

Thx for clarifying. CC is so sad, it sounds like something the milf would say.

[Grapefruits]

Just to show that I'm all about resolution, read this in the Province today:

Michael Smyth

"On the crucial issue of class size and composition, for example, the government proposes a $75-million-ayear “Learning Improvement Fund” to hire additional teachers, education assistants and other resources.

The union — saying the government is trying to escape the court judgment — has countered with a $225-million-a-year “Workload Fund” to be co-managed by the union and used “exclusively for the hiring of additional teachers.”

In other words, the Workload Fund would be used only to hire new members of the BCTF, because education assistants are represented by a different union.

Keep in mind education assistants work directly with special-needs students, and they make a lot less money than teachers.

So if this dispute is really “all about the kids” as the BCTF says, why would they oppose spending more money on the education assistants who work with the most vulnerable kids of all?

And because they work cheaper than teachers, you could hire more EAs to boot, increasing the bang for the buck spent on special-needs kids."

So, if that's really true (them wanting to use the funds just for new teachers), then it's something the union needs to budge on as myself and my wife (as you know she's a TOC) are against that and that the funds should be used as needed - that is, some for new teachers, some for EA, and some for tools.

There was more to the article:

Smyth: If it’s really about the kids, why are teachers making excessive demands?

By Michael Smyth, The Province September 4, 2014

It’s true the B.C. Teachers’ Federation beat the Liberal government like a pinata in court for illegally stripping their contract 12 years ago.

That’s why the union is bound and determined to extract such a lucrative new contract from the government this time around. To the victor go the spoils, after all.

But there’s just one thing: The court’s ruling does NOT require the government to enshrine the eliminated NDP-era class-size and composition limits in a new deal.

The judge herself said the old limits are not “clad in stone” and should be the subject of future collective bargaining.

Yes, the judge ruled the old limits were “restored retroactively” but that ruling was stayed by another judge as the government appeals to a higher court.

The stay was opposed by the union, which wanted the new limits restored immediately. The government argued successfully that would have caused chaos and cost a fortune to immediately shrink classes and rehire teachers, librarians and other specialists. (That’s right — despite their spectacular legal triumphs, the union lost the most recent critical skirmish in court.)

With the ruling in limbo until the matter is heard by the B.C. Court of Appeal — and likely by the Supreme Court of Canada after that — the two sides are left to negotiate a new contract in the meantime.

And that’s why the schools are shut down.

The union understandably feels it deserves massive new gains because of its court victory. The government understandably disagrees, knowing the court ruling carries no legal obligation to roll over to the union’s excessive new demands.

On the crucial issue of class size and composition, for example, the government proposes a $75-million-a-year “Learning Improvement Fund” to hire additional teachers, education assistants and other resources.

The union — saying the government is trying to escape the court judgment — has countered with a $225-million-a-year “Workload Fund” to be co-managed by the union and used “exclusively for the hiring of additional teachers.”

In other words, the Workload Fund would be used only to hire new members of the BCTF, because education assistants are represented by a different union.

Keep in mind that education assistants work directly with special-needs students, and they make a lot less money than teachers.

So if this dispute is really “all about the kids” as the BCTF says, why would they oppose spending more money on the education assistants that work with the most vulnerable kids of all?

And because they work cheaper than teachers, you could hire more EAs to boot, increasing the bang for the buck spent on special-needs kids.

Could it be because the union wants more union members paying more union dues into union coffers?

Say it isn’t so. After all, it’s all about the kids, right?

http://www.theprovince.com/news/Smyth+really+about+kids+teachers+making+excessive+demands/10172306/story.html

[Wilbur]

I think the issue with Smyth's article is going to be the fact that while EAs definitely do vital work with students, Smyth oversimplifies the issue as simply student to adult ratio. EAs do not create the lessons or educational programs, the teacher of the specific class does; EAs are indispensable in carrying out and assisting with their assigned special needs student(s), but the planning, prepping, and evaluating is done by the teacher. This becomes more difficult with more IEPs (Individual Education Plan) being required to address the diverse needs that occur more and more now in the classes.

So although well-meaning and cost-saving in intent, increasing the numbers of EAs does very little at actually alleviating the difficulties of high numbers of IEPs in a given class.

Wish I could give this more pluses. Couldn't have put it better myself.