jeffmo
Junior Member
Jeff...this is a discussion. No lies, no ill will, no right or wrong position. It is only by people talking and listening and observing that anyone learns anything. You are entitled to your opinion and you are just as entitled to to state it as much as anyone else. As long as you are not publically slandering anyone or lying you never have to worry about leaving the forums. Personally, I may not agree with everything you or other people state, but that doesn't mean you don't have the right and the obligation to state your opinions. Just as I'm sure that not everyone will agree with everything that I have an opinon about.
As to the subject at hand, if you look again at what I said, I said that it was a road that I really didn't want to go down but it was also the only reason that I could think of for the unions championing smaller class sizes. I'll stand by that comment until someone else can give me a reasonable explaination for wanting to reduce class sizes to 20-22 students per class, and also having one or two teachers aides in the same classroom as the teacher. I mean, wtf? 3 adults in one class to teach 20-22 kids?
BTW, don't, for a minute, think that I'm anti-union. Although I don't choose to be a part of one at this stage in my life, I used to work for the power and light company and was a member of the IBEW for 10+ years, and was a member of other unions before that. My own personal take on unions is that they can be a great source of protection for their members. Indeed, I think that at one time they were absolutely necessary in our culture. I also think that there are a lot of them that have abused their power over the years, and because of that they have hurt their standing in a lot of peoples eyes. Like everything else in this world, there are good and bad unions.
But this really isn't a discussion on the good or the bad of unions... it's a discussion about the children in our schools getting sub-standard educations and what we, as parents, think are possible solutions to that problem. Lets stick to that discussion in this thread and leave the union discussion to a different thread.
well,all i can go on is what i read.if the issue is brought up like i highlighted below,then i think that it definately WAS meant to bring unions into the issue.the statement implies that there is an ulterior motive toclass sizes.i just disagree and my main reason for that isn't because I am a union firefighter,it's because as the parent of a special needs child my wife and I have worked very closely with every one of his teachers and the school during his education.i've seen the problems the teachers face every day and in my honest opinion,the lack of parental involvement is one of the lager problems in our schools today:
"As much as I hate to go in this direction, the only thing that I can think of is the teachers union. Think about it.. if you have 500 students, and each class size is 35, then you need 14 teachers (union members paying dues) to teach those students. But if each class size is 20 students then you need 25 teachers to teach those same 500 students. A net gain of 11 union paying members making the teachers union that much richer. I'm not saying this is the only reason that teachers unions want smaller class sizes, but it certainly smells a little fishy to me that the single biggest voice in wanting smaller classes is also the one that stands to gain the most money from it. Just one more thing to think about."
And btw,no hard feelings whatsoever.i have discussed these issue MANY times over the last year with alot of people.it is what it is and sad to say,it's politics.(worst part of my job!)