"WCHS108" asks:
Not a new subject...but since all schools are 1 month into the year, the future of all the schools in the county; any possible merger ideas, and if so, which school should consider and with whom?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
3 comments:
I'll always comment on this topic, but I'll probably be a little more reserved than I have been in the past. (Oh great, here comes one of my soap box moments.)
If a county-wide consolidation does happen sometime in the future, I think it is extremely important that the future school district require all teachers to live within the boundaries of the new district.
Currently, USD108 Washington County has almost all of their teachers living within their district. Maybe there are one or two (no more than three) who don't. That is commendable.
On the other hand, the last time I did a study, a high number of USD 223 teachers did not live in the district. And many commute from one side of the district to the other to teach.
When the teachers and coaches do not live in the community in which they teach or coach, I believe their is a disconnect between the teachers and their students' families and therefore, the relationship is compromised.
Few of those non-resident teachers do their grocery shopping there, or attend booster club meetings, or go to church with families from their school, etc... how could they know the pulse of their community?
I know the excuse has been used that housing options are often limited in the smaller towns in the county, or there aren't enough job opportunities for the teacher's spouse.
Fine. But if there were a countywide district, there should be no remaining excuse.
Dan, I have to respectfully disagree that it should be a requirement that a teacher live in the district. My sister teaches in another state and used to live in the district in which she taught. When she moved to a neighboring district, she could have taught in that district. However she chose to continue teaching where she was. Both schools were good, and her salary would have been the same. She was incurring extra expense by driving further, but it was (and still is) worth it to her.
She says that's because she can now go places and enjoy her own family without school issues disrupting her private family time. When she lived in the district in which she taught, she'd be stopped during errands by parents who were well meaning but wanted to talk "just a minute" about how their child was doing in her class. When she was at a restaurant with her family, the same thing would happen. Or she would be uncomfortable in a public place when a parent was glaring at her and she knew it was because of recent heated discussions when they disagreed with her over a bad grade she gave their child.
She doesn't mind at all taking personal time to discuss school issues, but also felt that many times her own children felt that they were taking second place to other people's children because it's hard to tell parents that you don't want to or can't talk right then even if it's for just a few minutes.
I think it starts to become a problem when we start putting demands on teachers like that. We also have a smaller pool of which to draw from. I do think that housing is a very real issue that would have to be addressed.
There is some merit in a teacher living in the community though. It seems that it is easy for those teachers that live outside the community/county to leave as soon as school, practice or a game is over and not be accessible to parents and students. I definitley see the disconnect here. As a parent of school age children, I feel the disconnect too.
I am concerned that the teachers who do live in the community get dumped on a little. You see them doing things like taking money at the gate, sponsoring a class, working concessions etc.
Post a Comment