Senate Bill: Atlasian Education Modernization Act (Rejected)

[DemPGH]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

/quote]

Sponsor: Senator Scott

[DemPGH]

Unfriendly unless the amendment is modified to guarantee the right of teachers to unionize.

The constitution already does that so what's the point

Where does it say that?  I checked it and couldn't find any mention of unions.

VI.11 gives indication of that:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

There should be union representation of teachers during the above process, and I also support strongly urging if not requiring teachers to meet Masters level competency in their fields within a reasonable timespan.

[DemPGH]

The problem is, "good teaching," unless we're using very basic, broad criteria of actually teaching and actually engaging with students, is too hard to quantify. When I was in high school my friends and I would frequently disagree about the good teachers and the bad teachers. So that needs to be said.

Now, I have some real world knowledge of education law in the US, and it basically works this way: under 3-4 years on average a teacher is not tenured or "permanent status." They can be fired for any reason. And it does happen. After a teacher is tenured or permanent, particularly if in a local union, it's much harder to fire them: those cases go to court, and it is hard. A veteran teacher will not be fired for anything less than pretty serious misconduct. Most admins won't attempt it unless there is misconduct of some serious, quantifiable, provable nature. There are wrongful firings, and there are teachers allowed to scrape by who should not be. The issue is really a massive "can of worms." There is no clear cut way out of it, IMO, other than to attract bright people who love the fields they teach and thus will not become jaded as easily or as quickly. And that's another problem: a thirty-five year career as a teacher is too long.

[DemPGH]

Sorry, I have not been following this - it all overwhelmed me a bit. I have Wiki work to do today, so I'm supposed to open a vote - it's open. Go.

[DemPGH]

The vote has concluded with amendment 56:25 being accepted by a count of 6-2-2.

[DemPGH]

I believe it's time for a vote on 56:34 - I was supposed to set this up yesterday but I think we were waiting for status feedback. Vote, go.

[DemPGH]

Okay, we have six negatives on 56:34. It's finished.

Now we're proceeding to 56:36. Hit it, senators! Go.

[DemPGH]

Guys, we'd like to see if we can't put this thing out of its misery in the next couple days. Can we get this amendment over with ASAP so somebody can make a cloture motion, probably Polnut? Thanks! I don't want to have to start PMing the rest.

[DemPGH]

56:36 is tied 4-4 as time expires. I shall cast the tie breaker.

Section 4.1 is too restrictive for me - I would like to give students as much choice as possible in what they pursue in hopes of what will be preparation for college. Starting in 11th grade I think students should get to design their own curriculums. I think by 11th grade, a student should be able to say, "I want to stay away from this or that and go toward this or that."

However, there are plenty of things about the amendment that I do like - and hopefully within the rigidity of 4.1 students will have choices, as is evident with the electives.

The vote is affirmative. The amendment is accepted, 5-4.

Now, we would like to invite a cloture motion.

[DemPGH]

I believe we are now required to vote on cloture - to close debate and proceed to a final vote. Go.

[DemPGH]

Okay, we have voted in favor of cloture. Do we have anything resembling a final text? Is a final text possible?

At any rate, it is time for a final vote.

[DemPGH]

The bill is rejected and can be put to rest!