Dral Posted September 13, 2014 Share Posted September 13, 2014 So you're saying that students are equivalent to customers. No wonder why teachers are milking this situation. You have a whole lot more of control if you're the only players in town. As I mentioned, Telus, Rogers, Bell. The timing of when they put up the strikes is not a coincidence. Students got screwed prior to the end of the year (graduation, universities) and early Sept. Collateral damage? I think so. Right - if the government could pay anyone they wanted to teach in schools take a WILD guess what would happen to the already dismal quality of education students are getting.... go on... just guess.... I don't expect much though from someone who thinks grade 6 and 7 students should be allowed t the negotiating table Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazzle Posted September 13, 2014 Share Posted September 13, 2014 Right - if the government could pay anyone they wanted to teach in schools take a WILD guess what would happen to the already dismal quality of education students are getting.... go on... just guess.... I don't expect much though from someone who thinks grade 6 and 7 students should be allowed t the negotiating table I think they should be allowed. Only reason why they would be barred from the table is that both sides will have a WHOLE lot of explaining to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazzle Posted September 13, 2014 Share Posted September 13, 2014 Apples and Oranges. Now you're getting the picture. If this was apples and oranges to you, why are students considered as 'customers', as that person pointed out? Basically, why are students allowed to 'vote' on certain issues but not when the issue involves whether or not they go to school? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazzle Posted September 13, 2014 Share Posted September 13, 2014 Right - if the government could pay anyone they wanted to teach in schools take a WILD guess what would happen to the already dismal quality of education students are getting.... go on... just guess.... I don't expect much though from someone who thinks grade 6 and 7 students should be allowed t the negotiating table It could actually make the education system healthier. You have a new influx of teachers coming in. Universities are doing it by hiring 'sessional' instructors. Doesn't make it right but that's on a micro level. As long as the money flows, it's totally okay though right? It's funny. If there really is an issue about 'sessional' instructors being inferior than tenured teachers (this is completely debatable), do you think tenured profs will bring it up as an unacceptable practice? No. I don't think they would. They already have job security, therefore it's no longer their issue. Sessional instructors, on the other hand, are on their own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Remy Posted September 13, 2014 Share Posted September 13, 2014 Why is there a legal age for simply being a presence at the table? You'd really be surprised at how mature Grade 6 or 7 students are. They don't have valid opinions? This is absurd and I really hope you're joking. Do you teach grade six or seven, do you have a lot of experience with that? I have no idea what you're basing your statement on, but ... no. SOME students are fairly mature, relative to their age, but even grade 12 students, and many adults, have no conception of what teaching entails. There's a reason it's a trained profession. I'm a full grown adult, but that doesn't mean I have any basis for understanding how pipe fitters should be paid or assessed. I have no knowledge of that trade whatsoever. Why do you think anyone with an opinion should weigh in on education when so many aren't equipped to do so? Do you think kindergarten students should weigh in? What's your cut off age/grade and why? I don't think you thought this out at all. Nice triple post by the way, are you over-caffeinated or what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Remy Posted September 13, 2014 Share Posted September 13, 2014 Ironic double-post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazzle Posted September 13, 2014 Share Posted September 13, 2014 Ironic double-post. There's nothing ironic about a double-post there. Look up irony. Irony =/= hypocrisy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Remy Posted September 13, 2014 Share Posted September 13, 2014 There's nothing ironic about a double-post there. Look up irony. Irony =/= hypocrisy. It was ironic because I just called you out on your triple-post. Go grab a dictionary and come at me with something you actually know about, because it's clearly not English. Pick your battles there, young padawan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 13, 2014 Share Posted September 13, 2014 Now you're getting the picture. If this was apples and oranges to you, why are students considered as 'customers', as that person pointed out? Basically, why are students allowed to 'vote' on certain issues but not when the issue involves whether or not they go to school? Now you're getting the picture. If this was apples and oranges to you, why are students considered as 'customers', as that person pointed out? Basically, why are students allowed to 'vote' on certain issues but not when the issue involves whether or not they go to school? I hope I'm being trolled. Student associations are more about teaching children/young adults the workings of the "real world" than they are about students having a significant impact on the education system. Again, apples and oranges. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazzle Posted September 13, 2014 Share Posted September 13, 2014 Remy, this is the problem. I agree with you, for the most part, that an opinion should be taken seriously if there are qualifications for that person to speak on that topic. Example: an architect or a structural engineer discussing whether a structure is strong enough to withstand a potential earthquake. However, this is very much not practical for everyday things. You can still have a valid opinion, yet you don't have to have 'credentials' to say that. For example, you can hold an opinion that racism and harassment at a workplace affects the morale of the workplace. You don't need to have a degree to say that and be 'right'. Sometimes having a valid "educated" opinion is not allowed, example, jurors. Cops, lawyers, anyone who has a background of law' are not allowed to testify. I think we won't disagree with the above right? So, kids, certain students are forming student associations, etc, which have a presence in the school. They have 'voices. I don't see how this can be 'acceptable' but not acceptable for them to talk about strikes, etc. After all, students are voicing their opinion on mass media. Surely their opinion shouldn't be taken seriously right? I think they should not even bother talking at all since they, as you pointed out, "aren't involved in the negotiation process" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dral Posted September 13, 2014 Share Posted September 13, 2014 It could actually make the education system healthier. You have a new influx of teachers coming in. Universities are doing it by hiring 'sessional' instructors. Doesn't make it right but that's on a micro level. As long as the money flows, it's totally okay though right? It's funny. If there really is an issue about 'sessional' instructors being inferior than tenured teachers (this is completely debatable), do you think tenured profs will bring it up as an unacceptable practice? No. I don't think they would. They already have job security, therefore it's no longer their issue. Sessional instructors, on the other hand, are on their own. Just an FYI - a tenured professors first job is NOT teaching... it's research and publication... keep going tho, I'm thoroughly enjoying this hole you're digging yourself hehe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazzle Posted September 13, 2014 Share Posted September 13, 2014 I hope I'm being trolled. Student associations are more about teaching children/young adults the workings of the "real world" than they are about students having a significant impact on the education system. Again, apples and oranges. Student associations are RUN by students - not teachers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazzle Posted September 13, 2014 Share Posted September 13, 2014 Just an FYI - a tenured professors first job is NOT teaching... it's research and publication... keep going tho, I'm thoroughly enjoying this hole you're digging yourself hehe You're right. Their first job isn't about teaching. It's research and publication. My point still stands though. Their job security is fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazzle Posted September 13, 2014 Share Posted September 13, 2014 It was ironic because I just called you out on your triple-post. Go grab a dictionary and come at me with something you actually know about, because it's clearly not English. Pick your battles there, young padawan. I had three distinct posts. Yours was an accidental double post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Remy Posted September 13, 2014 Share Posted September 13, 2014 I'm not actually discounting student opinion en masse, I do have a lot of respect for how the current situation effects them. But that has to be tempered with some reality as well, which is to say that they can speak to how it effects them and that's about it. That's not unimportant at all, but to suggest they should be at the bargaining table trying to determine class size, composition, and wages, would be ridiculous. Sure you could get a few anecdotal tidbits, but nothing of real value. A high school student hasn't taught a classroom with different IEPs scattered about, so it's just not something they can speak to. And I'm actually being pretty up front and honest here because student opinion seems to be overwhelming in favour of teachers here, so it would be easy to say "let them have an equal say" - which is what you're suggesting by bringing them to the bargaining table - but in practice it just doesn't make sense. Not in that context. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 13, 2014 Share Posted September 13, 2014 You're right. Their first job isn't about teaching. It's research and publication. My point still stands though. Their job security is fine. What's your point? That the diminished number of tenured professors is having a negative impact on academia? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Remy Posted September 13, 2014 Share Posted September 13, 2014 I had three distinct posts. Yours was an accidental double post. That doesn't change, at all, the fact that it was ironic for me to double-post after criticizing your three posts in a row. Just back down on that one now because it's not an argument you'll win. Besides which, "three distinct posts" is still silly, you could easily reply to three people within one post. So let's not be asinine here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dral Posted September 13, 2014 Share Posted September 13, 2014 You're right. Their first job isn't about teaching. It's research and publication. My point still stands though. Their job security is fine. oh man thank you for this night Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 13, 2014 Share Posted September 13, 2014 Student associations are RUN by students - not teachers. Please enlighten me on the legislative authority held by a high-school student council. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazzle Posted September 13, 2014 Share Posted September 13, 2014 What's your point? That the diminished number of tenured professors is having a negative impact on academia? Does it really have a negative impact on academia? That should really be an afterthought. After all, you just said that their main priorities are research/publication. In all seriousness, why is it having a 'negative impact' on academia? Surely sessional instructors meet a certain standard for what the universities are looking for when it comes to teaching, prior to being hired? Kind of hard to argue for/against these points when we really don't know how universities are hiring these sessional instructors. Furthermore, we don't have a graph or statistics that show that sessional instructors are distinctively inferior to tenured professors. Are more students failing under sessional instructors? Are students less prepared for future courses? All of this is impossible to answer right now, without statistics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.