SENATE BILL: Atlasian Institute of Teachers Act (Law'd)

[HagridOfTheDeep]

So the only purpose of creating this huge organization is to administer a federal examination? You'll have to convince me that this is necessary at the federal level. I understand that teachers will be responsible for running this organization, but what will the structure of it be? Will we be tying up a couple teachers per school with additional AIT duties? If we're really dedicated to raising the quality of teachers, wouldn't it be better if they spent more time teaching?

Either way, the AIT will require more government workers to deal with clerical and administrative operations. So we'd invariably be growing the federal government.

Honestly, I'm inclined to think these issues could be dealt with on the regional level instead of creating more federal bureaucracy. Maybe have the regional education boards deal with administering the federal test.

Also, speaking of the test, I'm not sure if I like the idea of stipulating that 25% of applicants must fail. What if 85% of the applicants are perfectly acceptable? I'd much rather give a cut-off score than say "x many candidates will not be licensed."

Sorry for all the nitpicks, but I feel like we might be trying to solve one problem through a means that could actually create more problems.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

What is needed is some kind of indepth advocacy group that can detail and organize this, articulate what the Regions should do, how the Feds can help, draw upon RL sources from different sides of political divide come up with a comprehensive approach to reform that then can be used to push the Regions to reform and monitor those that have, can push the feds to act where and when needed, while opposing them where its not, etc etc. Doing that here, where most of the people are just coasting and get bored and disappear rather quickly is difficult, though.

When you say "here," do you mean Atlasia or the senate? For our purposes, do we really need an advocacy group? To me, now is a great opportunity to come up with a few standards that we can export to the regions without adding a lot of costs.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Aye

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Abstain

I voted for the wrong one, sorry.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

No objection. If it passes, I'd prefer it to be as disconnected from the government as possible.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

All right, I don't know if this amendment does what you want it to do or if the proposed solutions are agreeable, but here goes.

An Amendment:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I was really at a loss for the funding section. I largely based it off of how the Ontario College of Teachers (OCT) seems to operate. I'm really not sure if these funds are the organization's only source of revenue, but we might as well start here. The AIT and OCT seem quite similar.

I'm very open to suggestions if this amendment fails, and I'm also open to changes in the amended text if it passes. I know this is Simfan's baby, but I thought I might as well give us something to talk about.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

A quick google search says there are 6.2 million teachers in the United States Atlasia. That would put revenues at $806 million per year, not including the test money (6.2 million x $130). That does seem a little high for administering a test. I see no problem with lowering the fees. What would you suggest?

Yankee, would it be better to pass the current amendment and go from there, or change the amendment right now?

(Also, for later... Maybe we could include a provision that encourages/forces the AIT to donate all profits to the DoIA for redistribution to the regional education boards?)

[HagridOfTheDeep]

All right. Sorry for the delay... I had to make an emergency trip to Buffalo.

Simfan: I made the cost changes to the amendment above. Is it now friendly? I agree that charging teachers isn't great, but I do think it's the best option. It keeps the AIT self-sufficient and at a reasonable distance from the federal budget.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Aye

To be honest, I only offered my amendment to get the process going... I was unsure how I'd vote even after I proposed it. After thinking about it though, I believe the bill strikes a good balance between the regions, the federal government, and the teachers as an independent "unit." It's not a federal takeover (regions get a say), but it should still help to improve the quality of Atlasia's teachers. So it gets my support.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

What is done here is essentially what's done in real life in Ontario. Oh, the horror! Teacher-candidates have to pay to join a stupid little club! If that's your reasoning, I hope you'll be vetoing Senator Showstalker's recent bill too.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Me neither, even though it's a perfectly valid piece of legislation that many in the senate worked hard to pass.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

A test that automatically excludes 25% of attempts even if they are wholly qualified otherwise will not sort out good and bad teachers in any tangible sense.

I see two criticisms in here, one with which I agree (in fact, I brought it up earlier in the thread), and one with which I don't.

First, I agree that automatically failing 25% of candidates is problematic in many ways, because yes—those potential teachers could still be acceptible and qualified. I wish you'd said something earlier. I don't believe it's a deal-breaker, but if you eliminate that clause in a redraft, I'll likely support your effort.

On the other hand, it seems like you're also making the argument that teaching brings together many elements that are inherently "un-testable." And you're right. But if a teacher can't even grasp the material that he or she is supposed to be teaching, that's a problem. If the teacher's knowledge comes from a series of stockpiled handouts provided by a predecessor fifteen years ago, that's a problem. Atlasian history teachers should know the basic tenets of Atlasian history—if they don't, how can we expect their students to learn? If the AITs end up encouraging teachers to teach off the test, so be it—these are concepts that the kids and the teachers should know!

[HagridOfTheDeep]

You're right of course. But even if the AITs fall short of that goal, at worst, we've got a test that ensures teachers know the very basics of course content. And if a math teacher doesn't know math, it's not worth anyone's time or money that that teacher continues teaching. So even if all else fails, the AITs will still accomplish something that's of use—and that's important. That's all I'm really getting at.