Pegging The Bullshit Meter

[davidschroth]

On my way in to work, I was listening to MPR. Their show was about teaching, and the teacher's unions were coming under attack by callers.

The last caller I heard before I turned off the radio in disgust claimed that
they were an unemployed software engineer, laid off mumble-mumble months ago,
they had degrees in physics and astrophysics,
and they were African-American.

The first statement was ok (I know unemployed software engineers).
The second statement moved the needle slightly (I believe I know a software engineer with degrees in physics and astrophysics. It's an uncommon combination, in my experience).
The final statement really moved the needle - especially when the caller launched into a lament about how school districts, which have been laying off trained, experienced teachers, were not allowed by the teacher's union to give priority consideration for hiring him (totally untrained in teaching) over rehiring trained, experienced teacher.

The sense of privilege coming through the airwaves was palpable.

Comments

[dd-b.livejournal.com]

There are a lot of software people with random degrees (or no degrees), compared to other highly technical high-paid professions. I worked with one who had a PhD in philosophy -- in fact, he left where we worked to take a teaching job in philosophy while I was there.

I guess Cliff Stoll wasn't a software engineer (he was doing sysadmin work for a while), and didn't stay on the software side but went back to astronomy, so I suppose we can't count him.

The "two degrees" probably just means bachelor's and master's, probably meaning he dropped out of a PhD program and needed to find a job. I know a writer who has two degrees in physics, and one who has two degrees in English.

I have the feeling that both the schools, and teacher's training, have changed really drastically since I was there (I took most of the teacher certification courses in college, they were interesting), so I'm a bit leery of really having an opinion on the base issue, which is what ratio of subject knowledge and teaching knowledge are best in which teaching jobs. And unions trying to control who can be hired is kind of a hot-button issue for me; that's one of their more guild-like behaviors.

[davidschroth.livejournal.com]

I'm pretty sure I know a software engineer with degrees in physics and astrophysics. In over 30 years in the business, I've only known one (assuming the one I'm thinking of does have that collection of degrees).

I think it's possible, my experience suggests that it's really rare.

I'm unconvinced that subject knowledge actually makes one a good teacher of a subject, my (admittedly ancient) experience with college TAs strongly argues for a negative correlation.

Note that the caller offered no data to back up his assertion that it was the union that was getting in the way of his being hired. Since the hiring decisions are most likely made by administrators, I'm really skeptical on this point.

Random unsubstantiated union bashing happens to be one of my hot-button issues.

[dd-b.livejournal.com]

It is indeed entirely likely that the caller was not accurately describing what was happening around him. I was accepting it as the basis for discussion, not actually believing it.

One of the great benefits I got from NOT going to a university -- all my classes were taught by professors, there were no grad students to be TAs. And because we could afford a good one, it was all profs who wanted to teach undergraduates. So, probably greater subject knowledge, much more teaching experience, and quite probably more desire to teach undergrads.

I must absolutely agree that subject knowledge does not in and of itself make anybody any good at teaching it. On the other hand, at the highschool level and up, I don't think lack of subject knowledge can be effectively swept under the rug, either (at low levels, I'd expect an adult to mostly be able to acquire the subject knowledge by spending an evening reading a book).

Random unsubstantiated union bashing is certainly unfair and inappropriate.

Without knowing anything about the caller's actual situation, the hiring decisions of administrators are constrained by the terms of the current union contract in a union school, aren't they? So that detail doesn't inherently strike me as questionable; at least not for that reason. However, it's more likely that they were actually constrained by state law on teacher certification, from the sound of things (I don't think I know what state is involved; I happen to know a slight bit about California and Minnesota via arkuat, and they're different).

[davidschroth.livejournal.com]

I'm going to pick a nit, here. Unless the union unilaterally dictated the terms of the contract and forced the relevant managerial authorities to sign it, the contract constrains the hiring decisions of the administrators. Generally, both signatories to a contract agree on the contract, no matter how unpleasant each side might find individual sections. Blaming the union (singly) for a contract that was agreed upon (jointly) is not something I'm willing to go along with.

I actually think the caller was from Minnesota, although I'm no longer 100% sure of that.

[dd-b.livejournal.com]

Good point about the contract; you're quite correct that the agreed contract is what might be blocking hiring. If one had detailed history of the negotiations, I might try to say one side was responsible for certain provisions (the ones they pushed really hard for in the contract), but that's not relevant here, I don't have the data.

Of course, a fixed contract with such terms exists only because there's a union. Otherwise, there are policies and such, but administration can change them; in that case it's clearly the fault of the administration if you don't like the policies.

(I believe MN wants you to have a degree in the subject you're teaching for highschool level, as well as the teaching certification; whereas CA will let you teach a much broader range of things than what your degree specifies.)