Productivity Meetings



  • Those who can, do. Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach, administer.

    I just got dragged into a joint project. The joint team lead just made a mandatory series of meetings: 8-8:30AM, 12-1PM, 5-6PM (so as to minimize interruptions of the work day), Monday-Friday starting today, and running through the end of September, in order to make sure his project stays on schedule.

    When I've managed projects, I rarely needed meetings because I maintained open communication with everyone on the team (a two minute discussion when time permits get a person past bottlenecks, and makes sure things are progressing the way they need to for each task).

    This project started 6 months ago. They are still trying to figure out what the thing is supposed to do. It's due Sep 30 which means coding must be done by Aug 31 (although they think it doesn't need to begin QA testing until Sep 21) which means we have 3 weeks from today to do functional design, code and test it.

    Thus far, the two meetings today have entailed the project architect reading 10-step straight line use cases to 15 people who sat there, trying not to fall asleep. The document is on a share, so we can grab it and peruse through it any time we want. I asked for functional specs. Oh, we haven't gotten that far yet. The joint team lead then announces: Let's not get ahead of ourselves.

    I'm one of those people who jumps on a project to get it done ahead of schedule. I was raised with a mom-and-pop business, and was taught: do it quickly and do it right the first time, or you do it over on your time on your dime. That's pretty well ingrained in me, so I find it hard to not care. Accordingly, I'm not sure how to deal with this.

    Experience tells me that they'll recognize that they're not going to make it sometime around Sep 15, when it's too late to manage up (the customer) expectations.

    I guess this will be more fodder for you guys :)

    </rant>


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    Is your resume up to date? Two and a half hours per day of mandatory meetings until further notice is a really bad sign. What happened in the first two meetings is an even worse sign.



  •  You do realize the thread title is an oxymoron, right?



  • @jmucchiello said:

     You do realize the thread title is an oxymoron, right?


    whoosh



  • @PedanticCurmudgeon said:

    Is your resume up to date? Two and a half hours per day of mandatory meetings until further notice is a really bad sign.

    Plus the meetings assume you're in the office from 8-6 every day? Given, I don't have your "mom and pop" attitude, but I just wouldn't even show up at the late meeting. Leave at 4:30, don't bother explaining or apologizing.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    @PedanticCurmudgeon said:
    Is your resume up to date? Two and a half hours per day of mandatory meetings until further notice is a really bad sign.

    Plus the meetings assume you're in the office from 8-6 every day? Given, I don't have your "mom and pop" attitude, but I just wouldn't even show up at the late meeting. Leave at 4:30, don't bother explaining or apologizing.

     

    IIRC snoofle is a contractor, so while these meetings are boring wastes of time they should still be billable hours.



  • @snoofle said:

    Those who can, do. Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach, administer.

    Sorry, but I'll have to slap you for the second part of that saying. It's the single most moronic statement ever. It's one of the reasons, why we have a massive lack of teachers (be they good or bad) - who actually wants to take that abuse by zero-clue people who think they know all about teaching just because they've been pupils once?

    I mean, here on this very board we have guys who complain about clueless users and even more clueless management - and then they go right out and do it to other professions.

    Honestly, has anyone of you ever stood in front of a class for a whole day, 5 days a week?

    Here in Germany we have this saying: The way you shout into the forest determines the echo. It's the same way here: If you denigrate a whole profession like this, don't wonder why only the people looking for job security do it.
    There's a reason why Finland's universities have to limit the entrance to university for prospective teachers - even when they are paid less and are not tenured. Because they don't commit to that fallacy that, boohoo, you had one bad teacher, so per definition every teacher must be bad.

    It's also an insult to most of my own teachers who did quite a good job - yes, there were some bad apples. Then again, which profession does not have those? However, do we see people going: "Oh, WindowsME sucked, so all programmers must suck?" Nope.

    So, do me a favor, bury this stupid saying because it a) is not true, b) does not achieve anything and c) is actually counterproductive. Do you want bad teachers? Okay, then simply carry on. Heap on the abuse, insult them as bad as you can until only the most idealistic and the most moronic ones actually want to become a teacher. And, no, idealism is not a good predictor for good teaching abilities.

    /rant off


  • I @blakeyrat said:

    @PedanticCurmudgeon said:
    Is your resume up to date? Two and a half hours per day of mandatory meetings until further notice is a really bad sign.

    Plus the meetings assume you're in the office from 8-6 every day? Given, I don't have your "mom and pop" attitude, but I just wouldn't even show up at the late meeting. Leave at 4:30, don't bother explaining or apologizing.

    I did today; they called and said I HAD to be there, even if we're not allowed to bill over 40 hours weekly.

    I'll be escalating this tomorrow. With no benefits, all I have is my billable rate. I don't mind a free hour once in a while as it goes both ways, but this doesn't fly

    Aside, before I became a professional programmer, I taught full time at a university. Maybe it's just my personal experience with professional programmers, managers and teachers, but that saying seems to apply more often than not. Ymmv.



  • @snoofle said:

    I did today; they called and said I HAD to be there, even if we're not allowed to bill over 40 hours weekly.

    I'll be escalating this tomorrow.

    Simple math backs you up. Either they can the morning meeting, can the evening meeting, or let you take a split shift (and probably can the noon meeting in the process). But split shifts suck, so... they need to either pay you for your time, or can a meeting. Simple math.



  • @snoofle said:

    Aside, before I became a professional programmer, I taught full time at a university. Maybe it's just my personal experience with professional programmers, managers and teachers, but that saying seems to apply more often than not. Ymmv.
    Ah, of course, because teaching at a university is soooo much like teaching at a school. Oh, wait, it isn't.

    Of course, following your own paradigm, you just declared yourself to be inept.



  • @snoofle said:

    @blakeyrat said:
    Leave at 4:30, don't bother explaining or apologizing.
    I did today; they called and said I HAD to be there, even if we're not allowed to bill over 40 hours weekly.

    I'll be escalating this tomorrow. With no benefits, all I have is my billable rate. I don't mind a free hour once in a while as it goes both ways, but this doesn't fly

     

    I get that you're working contract basis, but when they started making us account for all our hours by project, I could either charge all the time spent in meetings to the project (which meant we used up the project's funded hours in two weeks time), bill them to "admin" (which meant they counted as "unproductive time") or, as blakeyrat suggests, blow off the meeting to do actual work.

    Blowing through the funded hours in meetings in turn led to long periods where we were forbidden to do actual work while someone went hat-in-hand to the users to ask for more funding.

     



  • @snoofle said:

    I just got dragged into a joint project.

    I don't understand why people always want to make that into a big project. Just roll it up and smoke already.



  • @Rhywden said:

    @snoofle said:
    Aside, before I became a professional programmer, I taught full time at a university. Maybe it's just my personal experience with professional programmers, managers and teachers, but that saying seems to apply more often than not. Ymmv.
    Ah, of course, because teaching at a university is soooo much like teaching at a school. Oh, wait, it isn't.

    Of course, following your own paradigm, you just declared yourself to be inept.



  • @snoofle said:

    I just got dragged into a joint project. The joint team lead just made a mandatory series of meetings: 8-8:30AM, 12-1PM, 5-6PM (so as to minimize interruptions of the work day), Monday-Friday starting today, and running through the end of September, in order to make sure his project stays on schedule.
    You couldn't have forced me to hold such meetings back when I was a lowly team lead. A meeting right before everyone leaves for the day - every day - for months?  I'd need a kevlar vest on just to feel somewhat safe.

    I can understand a meeting in the morning or afternoon, once every two weeks, IF I were doing SCRUM. I'm with you on this - casual, 2-5 minute checking-up sessions is all you need.



  • It's QUIETUST!  Haven't seen you two in a while!  Glad to know you're still around.



  • @Rhywden said:

    @snoofle said:

    Those who can, do. Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach, administer.

    Sorry, but I'll have to slap you for the second part of that saying. It's the single most moronic statement ever. It's one of the reasons, why we have a massive lack of teachers (be they good or bad) - who actually wants to take that abuse by zero-clue people who think they know all about teaching just because they've been pupils once?

    It's not moronic at all.  Teachers are glorified baby sitters.  Nothing will change my mind on this until Detroit's literacy rate exceeds at least 60%.



  • anyone scheduling a meeting from 12-1pm, recurring or not, would encounter a lynch mob at most places I've worked...

    honestly i'd probably start interviewing elsewhere, this project is doomed to failure. they aren't going to point fingers at you in that event are they?



  • Ok, normally I don't feed the trolls, but as someone married to a teacher, I'll interject the following:

    @snoofle said:

    Those who can, do. Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach, administer.

    Umm... some polite way of saying STFU, I guess. I like the rest of your story

     @Rhywden said:

    Sorry, but I'll have to slap you for the second part of that saying. It's the single most moronic statement ever. It's one of the reasons, why we have a massive lack of teachers (be they good or bad) - who actually wants to take that abuse by zero-clue people who think they know all about teaching just because they've been pupils once?

    QFT.

    @Bitter person said:


    It's not moronic at all.  Teachers are glorified baby sitters.  Nothing will change my mind on this until Detroit's literacy rate exceeds at least 60%.

     

     Detroit's literacy rate will exceed 60% when they let teacher's teach.  As for the babysitter thing, I couldn't say it better than this dude

    http://forums.redflagdeals.com/everyone-forgets-teachers-1046962/7/#post12996454

    @The Fucking Link said:

     Hmm, let's do some math. [url="http://www.online-nanny.com/average-babysitter-wage.html"]The average babysitter gets paid a minimum of $5 per hour per child. [/url] Class sizes can be up to 25 students. Let's say 20 students on average. That means the teacher should make $100 per hour. Now, earlier, someone mentioned that a teacher works a 6.5 hour day. That's $650 per day. A school year is 200 days long. That means a kindergarten teacher should make about $130000 per year at minimum babysitter rates. I GUARANTEE that any kindergarten teacher will take that deal knowing that they will be getting double the wages without needing ANY preparation/meetings etc. and only having the responsibility of your lowest paid babysitter.

    So, yes, I agree that 60k to babysit is sad. It should be at least double that number.

    Top that off with the fact that U.S. teachers make, like, half the fucking salary of a Canadian one.  And any teacher-- ANY teacher-- puts in 2 to 3 times the amount of hours that they're "paid" for. Correct me if I'm wrong, but is not half this thread dealing with complaints about having to work a couple unpaid hours? Yeah.

    And on a personal note, my STFU comes from someone who also hated highschool, and complained bitterly about most of my teachers out of bitter bitterness-- so it's also aimed at Past Self. But you fucking know what?  If it wasn't for a few good teachers, I never would have been inspired start writing (and would have never ended up published, or even writing here).  I would never have believed that I'd be smart enough to program a fucking computer (and thus open the path to my entire goddamn career). I would never have even thought I could succeed in post-secondary education. I would never have learned to write a resume, speak in public, dance on a stage-- basically everything that's ever enriched my life and made me the better person I am today.

    In conclusion: If any of our jobs vanished overnight, no one would give a fuck and the world would just roll on. None of us does anything even remotely approaching important.

    Teachers, on the other hand, are the profession that launch all other professions. They shape the minds of all future scientists, engineers, accountants, programmers, doctors, nurses, poets, dancers, woodworkers, authors, reporters, athletes, politicians, lawyers, activists-- et fucking all.



  • LET'S ALL TALK ABOUT TEACHING ALL THE TIME!!!



  • From my ex-wife (bless her soul): "Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach. Those who can't teach, teach teachers." She was a teacher, an elementary school teacher; great training for coping with a husband.



  • @Rhywden said:

    boohoo, you had [b]one[/b] bad teacher
    I wish...



  • In the 90s, I had many, many great teachers in my 6 years of highschool. Some weren't as charismatic as others; some downright boring while others could hold the attention of the entire classroom; but practically all of them were intelligent and knew their shit.



  • Teachers

     

    More Teachers



  • For the most part, my childhood was an entire waste, and my education full of half-truths and wives tales. Sad to say, looking back, I am forced to agree with my punk teenage self in loathing every minute of school. It was a waste of time, talent, opportunity, possibilities... Teachers were the problem. Teachers still are the problem. I am still bitter about it. I pretty much taught myself everything I know. The only thing I got from school was the confidence to ignore authority and educate myself.

    But not all the teachers were all bad, though. I had two or three good teachers. And they did inspire me. At least, inspire me to fix their problems.

    It is because of my awful childhood that I now have a great desire to become a teacher later on in life and try to right all the pervasive wrongs that are committed daily inside educational institutions. From my experience, the best teachers are ones who have had a great deal of life experience and lived life before they became teachers. I intend on following the same path. Once I'm old and graybearded, when languages like Python and Javascript and C# are mocked for their antiquity, after I stop understanding internet memes and miss out on social networks due to ignorance rather than apathy, when IPv4 is but a distant memory (I hope!), then I will settle down and give back what I was never given... I will become the problem, and I will solve it.



  • @Xyro said:

    For the most part, my childhood was an entire waste, and my education full of half-truths and wives tales. Sad to say, looking back, I am forced to agree with my punk teenage self in loathing every minute of school. It was a waste of time, talent, opportunity, possibilities... Teachers were the problem. Teachers still are the problem. I am still bitter about it. I pretty much taught myself everything I know. The only thing I got from school was the confidence to ignore authority and educate myself.

    But not all the teachers were all bad, though. I had two or three good teachers. And they did inspire me. At least, inspire me to fix their problems.

    It is because of my awful childhood that I now have a great desire to become a teacher later on in life and try to right all the pervasive wrongs that are committed daily inside educational institutions. From my experience, the best teachers are ones who have had a great deal of life experience and lived life before they became teachers. I intend on following the same path. Once I'm old and graybearded, when languages like Python and Javascript and C# are mocked for their antiquity, after I stop understanding internet memes and miss out on social networks due to ignorance rather than apathy, when IPv4 is but a distant memory (I hope!), then I will settle down and give back what I was never given... I will become the problem, and I will solve it.

    If only it were that simple, I have been in both sides of the problem and it is not easy.

    Being a good teacher is hard, fucking hard, and not all people are suited for this.

    I met my share of bad/ignorant teachers

    The best teacher I ever had was a Lit teacher who did not even want to become a teacher (he wanted to be a naval engineer) but he could command a classroom attention with ease.

    Now, from a teacher perspective I had one (yes only one) interesting student.  Most of the people who were there never even wanted to be there or did not like the subject (yes I know that nobody likes PHP or C++) so they did not share my passion toward always finding the best way to solve a given problem (I still love doing that although I know is not that useful in the real world).

    So if you want better teachers make it desirable to become one so that more talented people get there, and try to give them less shit, I mean come on, that was one of the shitties jobs I ever had (I concede that it had it moments)




  • Teacher sob stories are TRWTF. American public school teachers have the best part time jobs. I hear a lot about how they work more than 8 hour days. Guess what? So do a lot of people who don't get paid hourly. And as for pay, whatever they think they lack in take home is more than made up for in benefits. I have a friend who was bitching that now they have to pay a $5 copay for prescriptions and doctor visits. Oh, but then they submit the receipt to the union or something and get reimbursed!

    Obviously, you get some good and a lot of bad. Especially with the current system of job security for life and a lack of almost any merit based anything. Aside from those who are actually gifted and enjoy it and are able to self motivate, of course most of them don't care. Why should they? What's the upside? If your boss didn't really care if you did a good job, and none of your compensation depended on it, would you work as hard as you do now?

    Generally, "doing" in a field is more rewarding than teaching, and definitely less security. Obviously, there's not much reward in the sort of skills you're teaching in elementary school, so the aphorism doesn't apply so directly there.



  • @boomzilla said:


    Teacher sob stories are TRWTF.

    Where are any sob stories here? All I see are some guys who feel self-entitled to lay crap on a whole field and then have the audacity to cry a river when, surprise! nobody good wants to become a teacher anymore.



  • @Rhywden said:

    @boomzilla said:
    Teacher sob stories are TRWTF.

    Where are any sob stories here? All I see are some guys who feel self-entitled to lay crap on a whole field and then have the audacity to cry a river when, surprise! nobody good wants to become a teacher anymore.

    Well, I gave one in my post, for one. Lorne's post had some definite sob story juju going, too. I also gave some reasons why the teaching profession discourages good teachers. Apparently, your teachers failed at teaching reading comprehension. Also, you're way too fucking sensitive about a common generalization that actually has quite a bit of truth in it.

    Now, if you want a real sob story, read about the unemployed loser who has to eat a less expensive steak when he eats out due to a car tax.



  •  The Daily "Worthless Teachers" Flamewar



  • @boomzilla said:

    @Rhywden said:
    @boomzilla said:
    Teacher sob stories are TRWTF.
    Where are any sob stories here? All I see are some guys who feel self-entitled to lay crap on a whole field and then have the audacity to cry a river when, surprise! nobody good wants to become a teacher anymore.

    Well, I gave one in my post, for one. Lorne's post had some definite sob story juju going, too. I also gave some reasons why the teaching profession discourages good teachers. Apparently, your teachers failed at teaching reading comprehension. Also, you're way too fucking sensitive about a common generalization that actually has quite a bit of truth in it.

    Now, if you want a real sob story, read about the unemployed loser who has to eat a less expensive steak when he eats out due to a car tax.

    I could be wrong, but I don't think it's his car that is the cause of his marital status...



  • @boomzilla said:


    Well, I gave one in my post, for one. Lorne's post had some definite sob story juju going, too. I also gave some reasons why the teaching profession discourages good teachers. Apparently, your teachers failed at teaching reading comprehension. Also, you're way too fucking sensitive about a common generalization that actually has quite a bit of truth in it.

    Ah, yes, "reasons". Now, did your teachers also teach you that your reasoning must be grounded in reality? Here's a fun fact: "Common sense" is wrong quite often when it comes to matters beyond a simple A=>B relationship.
    For instance, such common sense tells us that you can increase teaching quality by simply reducing the number of pupils in a class room. Makes sense, doesn't it? However, since quality of teaching is dependent on a number of factors this reasoning is actually wrong.
    There are quite a lot of misconceptions and common generalizations which are simply wrong. Must have something to do with human's innate tendency to simplify things.

    In essence, if you want better teachers, make the job more attractive. However, you don't make a job more attractive by spitting on the applicants.

    As for the rest of the trolling, it's quite sad to see. Oh, well, the "common generalization" that computer nerds are an anti-social bunch who live in their parents' cellars and who never get laid must come from somewhere, huh?



  • My opinion of teachers would be a whole lot higher if:

    1.  Only worthy teachers taught

    and

    2.  Only worthy students were taught

    The profession as a whole is degraded by the unwashed masses effect.

    Education should not be compulsory.  Those who won't learn should get actual daycare.  Those who can't teach should get an MBA.



  • I don't see why everyone is getting so butt hurt thinking this had anything to do with school teachers, I don't see any reference to "school" in the OP. I think he was referring to what we see a lot of in the business world: those people that grasp the basic concept of subjects, but not enough to put all the pieces together and perform, so they end up training others on the basics. But I think his real point was that the idiots that can't even do that well always seem to end up in a higher position managing those subjects and trainwrecking them.



  • @error_NoError said:

    don't see any reference to "school" in the OP.
    Don't you? Not even in the first sentence?
    @snoofle said:
    Those who can, do. Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach, administer.



  •  @Lorne Kates said:

     Hmm, let's do some math. The average babysitter gets paid a minimum of $5 per hour per child.
    Class sizes can be up to 25 students. Let's say 20 students on
    average. That means the teacher should make $100 per hour. Now,
    earlier, someone mentioned that a teacher works a 6.5 hour day. That's
    $650 per day. A school year is 200 days long. That means a
    kindergarten teacher should make about $130000 per year at minimum
    babysitter rates. I GUARANTEE that any kindergarten teacher will take
    that deal knowing that they will be getting double the wages without
    needing ANY preparation/meetings etc. and only having the responsibility
    of your lowest paid babysitter.

    Here is the percentage by which teacher income exceeds the average worker's, by state:

    1) Pennsylvania     65.2

    2) Rhode Island     59.8

    3) Vermont     53.9

    4) Oregon     53.7

    5) Wisconsin     52.1

    6) Alaska     51.8

    7) Kansas     48.2

    8) Indiana     47.3

    9) Michigan     46.7

    10) Montana     43.1

    11) Connecticut     43.1

    12) Maine     42.2

    13) Iowa     41.5

    14) Maryland     41.3

    15) Wyoming     41.3

    16) Kentucky     40.8

    17) Ohio     40.8

    18) Nebraska     40.8

    19) Delaware     39.2

    20) New Jersey     38.7

    21) Washington     37.9

    22) New York     37.7

    23) California     37.6

    24) West Virginia    36.9

    25) Illinois     35.9

    26) Arkansas     35.8

    27) South Carolina    35.8

    28) Nevada     35.7

    29) Idaho     35.3

    30) Minnesota     34.9

    31) Florida     34.9

    32) New Hampshire    34.5

    33) Hawaii     32.7

    34) Tennessee     32.3

    35) South Dakota    32.2

    36) North Dakota    31.6

    37) Mississippi     31.1

    38) Massachusetts    30.6

    39) Colorado     30.4

    40) Missouri     29.9

    41) Utah     29.5

    42) Virginia     29.4

    43) Georgia     29.3

    44) Alabama     28.4

    45) Arizona     28.3

    46) New Mexico     26.6

    47) Oklahoma     25.3

    48) North Carolina    25.0

    49) Texas     19.0

    50) Louisiana     12.2

    51) District of Columbia    2.9

    I don't think babysitting should be a government-funded enterprise, and I damn sure don't think baby sitters should make more than the average worker for whom they are babysitting.



  • @PJH said:

    @error_NoError said:
    don't see any reference to "school" in the OP.
    Don't you? Not even in the first sentence? @snoofle said:
    Those who can, do. Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach, administer.
    I'm squinting really hard, but I'm not seeing it either...



  • @Rhywden said:

    ...blah, blah, random blathering...

    In essence, if you want better teachers, make the job more attractive. However, you don't make a job more attractive by spitting on the applicants.

    WTF are you talking about? Do you really think this is a meaningful reply to anything in this thread?

    @Rhywden said:

    As for the rest of the trolling, it's quite sad to see. Oh, well, the "common generalization" that computer nerds are an anti-social bunch who live in their parents' cellars and who never get laid must come from somewhere, huh?

    Hmmm...is this you projecting or speaking from experience?



  • @boomzilla said:

    @Rhywden said:

    ...blah, blah, random blathering...

    In essence, if you want better teachers, make the job more attractive. However, you don't make a job more attractive by spitting on the applicants.

    WTF are you talking about? Do you really think this is a meaningful reply to anything in this thread?

    @Rhywden said:

    As for the rest of the trolling, it's quite sad to see. Oh, well, the "common generalization" that computer nerds are an anti-social bunch who live in their parents' cellars and who never get laid must come from somewhere, huh?

    Hmmm...is this you projecting or speaking from experience?

    It's really funny that you were the one talking to me about "lacking reading comprehension".



  • @boomzilla said:

    @Rhywden said:

    ...blah, blah, random blathering...

    In essence, if you want better teachers, make the job more attractive. However, you don't make a job more attractive by spitting on the applicants.

    WTF are you talking about? Do you really think this is a meaningful reply to anything in this thread? @Rhywden said:
    As for the rest of the trolling, it's quite sad to see. Oh, well, the "common generalization" that computer nerds are an anti-social bunch who live in their parents' cellars and who never get laid must come from somewhere, huh?
    Hmmm...is this you projecting or speaking from experience?

    What is the difference?

    His experience or other people experience is experience either way

    I don't live in a cellar btw



  • @boomzilla said:

    @Rhywden said:
    As for the rest of the trolling, it's quite sad to see. Oh, well, the "common generalization" that computer nerds are an anti-social bunch who live in their parents' cellars and who never get laid must come from somewhere, huh?
    Hmmm...is this you projecting or speaking from experience?

    I missed that last one (I tl;dr about 9 words in)...  Could be both or neither.  Usually when someone resorts to name calling, they've already lost the argument and they know it.



  • @C-Octothorpe said:

    @boomzilla said:

    @Rhywden said:
    As for the rest of the trolling, it's quite sad to see. Oh, well, the "common generalization" that computer nerds are an anti-social bunch who live in their parents' cellars and who never get laid must come from somewhere, huh?
    Hmmm...is this you projecting or speaking from experience?

    I missed that last one (I tl;dr about 9 words in)...  Could be both or neither.  Usually when someone resorts to name calling, they've already lost the argument and they know it.

    Well, then you might consider telling Boomzilla that he lost his argument? I merely took his "generalizations must have a kernel of truth to them" and changed it to an area closer to home.
    If you now believe that I find this generalization to contain a kernel of truth, then you should also consider that just before making that statement, I also spoke out against generalizations and that they often are not based on reality at all.
    Of course, if you rip that one sentence out of context, you might arrive at a faulty conclusion. Not my fault, though.



  • @C-Octothorpe said:

    Usually when someone resorts to name calling, they've already lost the argument and they know it.
    You're a towel!

     



  • @hoodaticus said:

    @Rhywden said:
    @snoofle said:

    Those who can, do. Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach, administer.

    Sorry, but I'll have to slap you for the second part of that saying. It's the single most moronic statement ever. It's one of the reasons, why we have a massive lack of teachers (be they good or bad) - who actually wants to take that abuse by zero-clue people who think they know all about teaching just because they've been pupils once?

    It's not moronic at all.  Teachers are glorified baby sitters.  Nothing will change my mind on this until Detroit's literacy rate exceeds at least 60%.

    Bro, are you being serious right now? The problem with schools in Detroit is that the public unions are plowing the fuck out of them. For example, a philanthropist wanted to donate $200mil to Detroit schools, but that was rejected by the union; see here. Additionally, Teach for America personnel were not allowed to teach in Detroit for a period of about 5 years, because of the union. So what you're really looking to say here is that public unions are complete and utter shit whose entire existence depends on doing the least amount of work for the most amount of money, and that's something we all agree with.



  • @Rhywden said:

    Well, then you might consider telling Boomzilla that he lost his argument?

    You mean because no one believes it when you say so?



  • @Rhywden said:

    @C-Octothorpe said:

    @boomzilla said:

    @Rhywden said:
    As for the rest of the trolling, it's quite sad to see. Oh, well, the "common generalization" that computer nerds are an anti-social bunch who live in their parents' cellars and who never get laid must come from somewhere, huh?
    Hmmm...is this you projecting or speaking from experience?

    I missed that last one (I tl;dr about 9 words in)...  Could be both or neither.  Usually when someone resorts to name calling, they've already lost the argument and they know it.

    Well, herp derp.

    FTFY



  • The bickering explodes across the screen!



  • @Power Troll said:

    Bro, are you being serious right now? The problem with schools in Detroit is that the public unions are plowing the fuck out of them. For example, a philanthropist wanted to donate $200mil to Detroit schools, but that was rejected by the union; see here. Additionally, Teach for America personnel were not allowed to teach in Detroit for a period of about 5 years, because of the union. So what you're really looking to say here is that public unions are complete and utter shit whose entire existence depends on doing the least amount of work for the most amount of money, and that's something we all agree with.
    Unionizing also gives away the lie that this profession is all "for the children".  If that were so, teachers would want to make less money, so that they could hire more teachers!

    I am sick and tired of these people being treated like saints, when their work product is hordes of illiterate fiends with an entitlement mentality.(see also: riots in Britain).



  • @hoodaticus said:

    @Power Troll said:

    Bro, are you being serious right now? The problem with schools in Detroit is that the public unions are plowing the fuck out of them. For example, a philanthropist wanted to donate $200mil to Detroit schools, but that was rejected by the union; see here. Additionally, Teach for America personnel were not allowed to teach in Detroit for a period of about 5 years, because of the union. So what you're really looking to say here is that public unions are complete and utter shit whose entire existence depends on doing the least amount of work for the most amount of money, and that's something we all agree with.
    Unionizing also gives away the lie that this profession is all "for the children".  If that were so, teachers would want to make less money, so that they could hire more teachers!

    I am sick and tired of these people being treated like saints, when their work product is hordes of illiterate fiends with an entitlement mentality.(see also: riots in Britain).

    This.


  • @hoodaticus said:

    @Power Troll said:

    Bro, are you being serious right now? The problem with schools in Detroit is that the public unions are plowing the fuck out of them. For example, a philanthropist wanted to donate $200mil to Detroit schools, but that was rejected by the union; see here. Additionally, Teach for America personnel were not allowed to teach in Detroit for a period of about 5 years, because of the union. So what you're really looking to say here is that public unions are complete and utter shit whose entire existence depends on doing the least amount of work for the most amount of money, and that's something we all agree with.
    Unionizing also gives away the lie that this profession is all "for the children".  If that were so, teachers would want to make less money, so that they could hire more teachers!

    I am sick and tired of these people being treated like saints, when their work product is hordes of illiterate fiends with an entitlement mentality.(see also: riots in Britain).

    At least over here in Germany you have to have a University's degree (Master, not bachelor!) and then another 1 and a half year of training on the job. So, that's one reason why "less money" would not exactly result in more teachers.
    However, the question of "let's pay them less money so we can hire more teachers" cannot even be raised - because in several subjects, there are NO teachers for hire!

    For example, a friend of mine teaching physics and mathematics was able to choose between 12 schools who all desperately wanted to hire her. And those 12 schools were the ones she talked to - she could have taken another 20 into consideration!
    So, riddle me this: How exactly is less pay supposed to conjure teachers into existence when there's already too few teachers available in general?

    And the riots in Britain are rooted in an entirely different environment. Laying blame for that solely on teachers is another example for "A->B"-thinking.



  • @hoodaticus said:

     Here is the percentage by which teacher income exceeds the average worker's, by state:

    1) Pennsylvania     65.2

    2) Rhode Island     59.8

    3) Vermont     53.9

    4) Oregon     53.7

    5) Wisconsin     52.1

    6) Alaska     51.8

    7) Kansas     48.2

    8) Indiana     47.3

    9) Michigan     46.7

    10) Montana     43.1

    11) Connecticut     43.1

    12) Maine     42.2

    13) Iowa     41.5

    14) Maryland     41.3

    15) Wyoming     41.3

    16) Kentucky     40.8

    17) Ohio     40.8

    18) Nebraska     40.8

    19) Delaware     39.2

    20) New Jersey     38.7

    21) Washington     37.9

    22) New York     37.7

    23) California     37.6

    24) West Virginia    36.9

    25) Illinois     35.9

    26) Arkansas     35.8

    27) South Carolina    35.8

    28) Nevada     35.7

    29) Idaho     35.3

    30) Minnesota     34.9

    31) Florida     34.9

    32) New Hampshire    34.5

    33) Hawaii     32.7

    34) Tennessee     32.3

    35) South Dakota    32.2

    36) North Dakota    31.6

    37) Mississippi     31.1

    38) Massachusetts    30.6

    39) Colorado     30.4

    40) Missouri     29.9

    41) Utah     29.5

    42) Virginia     29.4

    43) Georgia     29.3

    44) Alabama     28.4

    45) Arizona     28.3

    46) New Mexico     26.6

    47) Oklahoma     25.3

    48) North Carolina    25.0

    49) Texas     19.0

    50) Louisiana     12.2

    51) District of Columbia    2.9

     

     It would be even more impressive if that was an hourly comparison, rather than a yearly one.

    It always steams me when people and sit-coms trot out the old wive's tale that teachers are low-paid.   I used to be a counselor, had similar education to teachers, and I was low-paid.  I would have loved to receive teacher's pay.  I would have loved even more to have received teacher's pay for teacher's hours.  Bankers drool when they think of teachers' hours.  

    Yes, I know that there are some additional hours outside of the classroom, but my point still holds.

    Higher pay only gets higher-quality employees when those in charge of hiring and firing can distinguish between and are allowed to distinguish between people who are good at their craft and those who are not.   Overall, I think you get better teachers when those who teach do it because they want to teach, not because it has fantastic hourly pay.

    Teachers unions (like all unions) raise pay without raising work quality.  On the other hand, it does seem that there's a growing tendency to micromanage teachers.  One way of increasing pride in work quality is to allow some independence.


     


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.