Should we blame the P & C's bias in favor of CCSD Superintendent Nancy McGinley's Controlled Destruction (aka School Redesign) plan on the reporter, the editors, or the headline writers--or on all three? How else to explain the slanted coverage of the Charleston Teacher Alliance's survey of its members' opinions? [See Some Teachers Support Overhaul]Here's a more appropriate headline: "Only Half of Teachers Support Plan." Or how about "Nearly Half of Teachers Oppose Plan."
See what I mean?
Superintendent McGinley would never dare to survey teachers herself. The results would be too embarrassing. Well, they would be if teachers could be sure of no repercussions. This one was done by what passes for an independent teacher's organization, the Charleston Teachers Alliance started by Andrew Ha-Levi.
Look what those not happy about McGinley's plans suggested as a savings:
Many suggested looking at district support staff such as specialists, lead teachers, administrative staff and instructional resource teachers, and moving them back to classrooms. If the district is to a point where schools need to be closed or combined, officials should evaluate the necessity of those positions, said Kent Riddle, chair of the Charleston Teacher Alliance.
Apparently they don't believe that, as McGinley countered, cutting those positions would bring irrevocable harm to instructional leadership.
In other words, there's too much pork at the top. Who's in a better position to know?
Posts
3 comments:
I also noticed the slanted headline. But what bothered me more was Nancy McGinley's comments saying "the district's projected improvement rating of 'excellent' was achieved through strategies that involved positions such as teacher coaches. Those supports can be cut, but it would hurt schools' instructional leadership, she said."
If I'm reading those comments correctly, our superintendent is declaring the district's projected rating of "excellent" has been achieved. Did I miss something here or have I been asleep. Our great leader must have put excellence in more more than a thousand classrooms when nobody was looking.
Sounds like more hyperbole to me. Just like her plan for school closures and reorganization. Other than the big round numbers she's using, what exactly are the savings (and added costs) behind McGinley's plan and who'll be taking the biggest hits? People are asking but McGinley isn't telling.
Oh Ho
Check out today.
we Teachers were right
furloughs, pa cuts letting teachers go. It was in the news tonight and our email!
By the way the day the school redesign was announced in September She hired 480,000 dollars for new positions. Shouldn't they be the first things cut!
Post a Comment