Monday, May 07, 2007

Wow, been a while!

Ok, it's only been about 8 months since my last post. Been busy teaching, coaching, etc. Leaving the Willamette Valley soon and moving to the Columbia Gorge. Picked up some new hobbies since my last post. Stated fly fishing.

It's more fun than politics and illegal immigration and such. When you realize you can't do anything about politics, and the politicians don't care about illegal immigration, you come to the epiphany that you really only have one choice...

Go fishing...

Sunday, September 24, 2006

Nice way to spend a Sunday....


Coffin Mountain. A moderate hike, only about 2.5 miles from the trail head. Awesome views of mtns. Jefferson, Hood, Washington, 3 Sisters, etc. So close to Mt. Jefferson it feels like you could skip a rock off the top of it. Highly recommended trip to help get away from the lunacy of the world. Too bad tomorrow is Monday...

Wednesday, September 20, 2006

Voter ID rant

Thanks to Orbusmax for this heads up, website that always find something irksome out there...

Pelosi: Voter ID Bill Is an Attempt to Suppress the Votes of Millions of American Citizens

There really isn't too much to say about this that isn't already COMMON SENSE. We need a photo ID to drive a car, to cash a check, to get our own money out of the bank, to fly across the country, to use my own credit cards, etc. Why would you NOT need a photo ID to vote? In Marion County, I had to send in a photocopy of my driver's license to get my voter registration changed. Has that been struck down yet because it suppresses my right to vote?

At least in Marion & Polk counties here in Oregon, everyone gets a voter registration card when they register. If I simply put my picture on it, does that suppress my right to vote?

PELOSI, ARE YOU FREAKING NUTS? Who elects these nut jobs to represent them? Is this the BEST that California can put out to represent them?

Sunday, September 17, 2006

Merit Pay: Addendum

Of course, in my haste, I forgot to make my biggest point. The whole idea behind merit pay makes one HUGE false assumption, and I was guilty of it as well in my post below. The merit pay idea assumes that all teachers have chosen this career because of the high monetary compensation. Well, teachers don't make that much (especially young ones!). There must be some other motivating factor as towhy people choose the teaching profession. I'll leave that one open for discussion...

...with one caveat: There is already a disproportionate number of older teachers to younger teachers in the United States (i.e. lots of Baby Boomer teachers, fewer younger ones). There is NO DOUBT that there is an anti-teacher politcal climate in the state of Oregon. Teachers (even young ones) are smart people. they will leave the profession, or never enter it to begin with! The adage that "those who can, do, and those who can't, teach" is ridiculous. Step into a classroom and tell me that.

Like I said before, each teacher does a different job (even though they may teach right next to each other), so it's impossible and not really fair to judge them all by the same criteria. For example should this teacher be paid more because she saved a student's life? And don't say that is one incident. Google "teacher saves life" and see what you come up with. Or read what a student wrote to this teacher. How do you fairly compensate that?

How much is saving a life worth these days? Should we pay police based on the amount of crimes they stop? Or firemen based on the amount of fires they put out?

Enough ranting...it's Sunday, and I've got school work to do.

Issues with Merit Pay for Teachers (from a teacher)

As requested (and promised), here is a short (hopefully) and by-no -means complete, discussion about why I think merit pay stinks. Actually, let me re-phrase that. Merit pay in theory is a great idea. Where it begins to break down is in how it actually works in reality, a reality that the Chalkboard Project even recognizes. Again, this is not a complete argument, and is based purely on my observations as a second-year teacher.

Taken at face value, "merit pay" suggests that if (for example) you have two teachers and one teacher's class does better on a standardized test than the other teacher's class, the first teacher should be given a bonus (merit pay). If that isn't the basic argument, then someone correct me, and stop reading here because the rest of this discussion is based on that basic assumption.

Problems:
1) Teachers don't all teach the same classes or the same kids. For example, should an AP History teacher get paid more because his kids will do better on the "end of year" exams than a "regular" History class teacher? According to merit pay, yes!

2) Kids come into school with differing levels of prior knowledge. It's common knowledge that children from more affluent familes tend to have more educational opportunities (interpret that however you want to in order to make it politically correct) than kids from lower socioeconomic level families. What if teacher 'A' has more 'poor kids' than teacher 'B'. Teacher 'B's kids will most likely perform better on standardized tests because those students came in with more previous educational opportunities before they even arrived at school. If that needs more clarification, let me know. For example, comparing two (2) school districts high schools...why has Lake Oswego HS gotten an "Exceptional" report card rating the past couple years, while only one high school (Lincoln HS, out of ten or so others) in the entire Portland School District gotten an "Exceptional" rating? In fact, a number of PPS high schools were rated "Low". I mean really, are the Lake Oswego teachers all that much better than all but one PPS high school? Would anyone really argue that nearly all the teachers in PPS district should be paid less than the Lake Oswego teachers?

3) If the above scenario is accurate (correct me if it is not), then the Lake Oswego teachers should be paid more than the Portland Public School District teachers. This doesn't even include cost of living factors, as I'm not going to waste time with the obvious distinctions between school districts. So let's assume I'm a new teacher (not too big of a jump for me), looking for a teaching job. Why in the world would I want to go to the Portland School District if I can get a job at Lake Oswego? Why would I want to go to a district where I would have to work twice as hard to get the students to achieve half as much as Lake Oswego students, when the Lake O teachers are working half as much and getting twice the results...and teachers are making MORE MONEY because their students are doing better on standardized tests.

4) Something that maybe should have been talked about before, but that is the issue of "standardized tests". So, in order for teacher 'A' to be "judged" against his peer teachers (for compensation purposes), his students have to take the same standardized test as teacher 'B'. Because that's how we measure "learning", right? Hopefully teacher 'A' doesn't have more kids on IEP's (individual education plans), because those kids often times aren't held to the same standards as other kids. Also, all of teacher 'A's students better have scored just as well as teacher 'B' students in their tests the previous year. If not, is it really fair to judge the two teachers against each other? They are basically doing different jobs (or at least starting at different places/levels).

5) The Chalkboard Project HAS recognized some of these issues, and in recognizing those issues they have given school districts an 'out'. They want to make "alternative compensation reforms" (read: Merit Pay) "voluntary". They recognize that different school districts will or will not be able to implement merit pay, because it would choke the life out of the teachers in the district. Example: If one district uses merit pay, and another doesn't, why would I want to teach in the merit pay district? Again, that doesn't include living issues (living in Salem vs. living in Harney County).

Ok, this is all I have time for right now, and it's barely scratching the surface. Please, take issue with any or all of the above, and I'll try to address the questions to the best of my ability and experience. For more info, and an interesting read, check out the Chalkboard Project and specifically these two PDF's about their action plans:

Pay for Performance
Working Group Fact Sheet

Since Mr. Saxton is quoting the Chalkboard Project specifically, we might as well all be looking at the same info. If you want more info (pro and con merit pay), just Google it. Hopefully this can be a continuing discussion, but I make no promises about being able to blog more. I'll be teaching, after all...

Working with "Migrants"...


Never got the chance to mention this, but I spent the last week in August working with a bunch of hispanic gentlemen during the bartlett pear harvest in Hood River. It's nice to get out in the fresh air just below Mt. Hood for that last week of freedom before heading back to school for 9 months. I do have some general comments about what has lately become an annual tradition:

1) Harvesting fruit is not an easy job. I wasn't even picking the fruit, I was just driving a tractor throught the rows of trees...moving or hauling away bins of pears (see picture). Would I want to do this job full-time? No way.

2) The pay isn't very good. Now, I was working for my father-in-law, so I was getting "other-than-usual" perks. However, the hourly rate I was getting from him was only 40% of the hourly rate I make as a teacher. Plus, I came back with bruises, scrapes, lumps, and a sun-burn (95 degree days, 10 hours a day in the sun). Now the guys who were picking the fruit...they made less than I did, and they were working much harder. Hauling a 30 lb. bag of fruit up and down ladders for 10 hours is no easy task. Now compared to last year, these guys were slow pickers. The best of them made about $9-$10 an hour.

3) For me, communication was nearly impossible. Luckily, I'm used to working with 9th graders who don't understand normal english either (some of my students think "LOL" and "IMHO" can be used in essays). I was the only white guy, and only the other tractor driver spoke passable english. Basic hand signals was the mode of communication. In fact, my father-in-law mentioned to me that a couple neighbors drove by and asked him, "Who's the white guy working for you?" Funny stuff.

Commentary:There's a reason (or 10) why "American's won't do this job". It's sucks, and the pay isn't good. There are good things about it (fresh Mt. Hood air). For the pickers, my father-in-law provides FREE HOUSING (including electricity, water, garbage, maintenance). But they don't get insurance (pity, huh?). Even talking to him, he's assumes that a majority of the workers he has are not legal residents. Sure, they have all the right paperwork and documents, or he wouldn't hire them. But he can't do anything if he sees something suspicious.

Recently, he told me he's been having a hard time finding workers. There just aren't any, which he attributes to the tighter security on the border. It's a situation that has put me on the fence. If there aren't enough workers, "market forces" suggest that 1) There just isn't a labor pool, or 2) The wages are not high enough to attract workers, or 3) Something else?

My theory is this: There is a shortage in the labor pool because migrant workers (legal or not) are leaving the agriculture industry becuse it doesn't pay as well (or have working conditions as good as) the construction or service industries. I think that when the housing boom levels off (as we've heard it is) or dies off, the demand for these workers will decrease. Migrant workers will return to where the demand is (ag jobs). According to census numbers, the hispanic population is higher than it has ever been in the United States (and it's growing). Why aren't there enough fruit pickers, then? If the fruit harvest is a job that "American's won't do", doesn't that mean that the problem is not that "white people" won't do that job, it's that once people (White or black or brown or whatever) are here and are prosperous or educated enough, the job of harvesting fruit is really "beneath" their education or standard of living levels.

The biggest problem with my theory (which I'm sure is not an original one), is that there is too much COMMON SENSE involved in it. Either the AG Industry must change to reflect a changing economy, or the economy must change. I'm guessing both will have to change to some degree, if either will survive.

~Diesel

Another politcal season...

Is it that time of year again? Oh yes, I was so busy doing my job that I forgot my job was turning out to be a political football once again. Yeah, I'm a teacher. I'm also pretty much anti-union, an independent-conservative, and I vote pretty much Republican in each election.

NOT THIS YEAR!

I've been voting now for a whopping 8 years. For my two presidential elections, I've been faithful to my roots, and scared of what the Democrat party offered for candidates (Gore & Kerry). I've been a faithful Bush-backer, even when he's made mistakes (we can't impeach every president that makes a mistake, silly Dems).

Yet every gubernatorial election in Oregon, I've voted with the Dems. Kitzhaber ('98), Kulongoski ('02), and now....? Kulongoski hasn't done anything worth voting for, yet he's still the "lesser of two evils" this year.

Anyone that thinks Ron Saxton has the right ideas is off their rocker. My biggest reason for not voting for Saxton (or maybe against him) is his complete endoresement of the Chalkboard Project's merit-pay "musings". (more on this to come)

Who am I voting for this election season? NONE OF THE ABOVE.

WHY CAN'T OREGON FIELD A GOOD REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE FOR GOVERNOR???????

Google