Letters to the Editor 07/07/2010

To the Editor:

At first glance, the two-column article in The Nugget last week by Howard Jameson, challenging my relatively short letter the week before that teachers are overpaid was mild irritation. 

Of course, anyone can pick out a specific teacher and assert for various reasons that s/he is underpaid. In the example Mr. Jameson picked, I happen to agree with him.  The problem of starting every teacher, regardless of background, education and experience at the same salary as a 22-year-old student just out of college is for another discussion, not the one I addressed and Mr. Jameson ignored. 

He also missed my point completely when I compared the average cost per teacher in the Sisters School District with other employees in the state who make over $100,000 a year.  Of course, most people know that teachers are paid on a 12-month contract and don't actually make that much money. It is the comparison that counts - not many workers in the private or public sector earn as much on an hourly basis. 

And no matter how many hours of unpaid overtime a person works, regardless of the job, this does not enter into salary computation if it is necessary to get the job done.  After all, no one is chained to their desk and forced to work long hours. The option to quit is open to every employee, and that includes teachers as well. 

In his example, Mr. Jameson asserts that the man "doesn't need the money and his day is spent with students making excuses and disrupting his class, anything but learning."  If this is the case I would assume this man is not a very effective teacher if he can't control his students. 

Before Mr. Jameson jumps to the conclusion that I know nothing about teaching, my wife taught high school, our daughter currently teaches middle school, and I taught at a community college, both credit and extension classes for 10 years. 

Let's try again, Mr. Jameson, with the average annual cost of a teacher in Sisters at $81,859 (meaning many earn less but others must earn more), and with the rate of increase at 17.1 percent over the last four years alone, something has to give.

Don't forget teachers have tenure, in general don't have to worry about losing their jobs, and can retire after only 30 years. Are taxpayers expected to provide an unlimited amount of money for educating their children?

My wife and I have lived in Oregon for 50 years, in Sisters for 15, and each year the cost of education goes up far beyond that of inflation. Who is to blame? A large measure is because teachers claim to be professionals but at the same time are members of a union. As union members, their salary is based on seniority as well as certain levels of education completed, none of which equate with the ability to

teach. 

The problem of how much each teacher is paid will eventually be solved by the teachers themselves.  Someone once said that the best teachers are born to teach and know it, and those that are not move on to some other job. Most teachers would agree with this, and why so many good ones put up with school politics, demand order in their classrooms, and do a darn good job teaching our kids. My respect goes out to all of them.

Kenneth E. Ehlers

•••

To the Editor:

I went to the July 2, 2010 meeting of the Sisters school board hoping to learn about the board and district's budget and salary system. The meeting was interesting and somewhat informative. This was supposed to be a work session that would run from 8 a.m. to noon. Several times during the meeting it was stressed that they, the board, need to take time and go over all of the aspects of the agenda items, and yet there was continuous pressure from the chair to keep moving and stay on the schedule, which seems to be in conflict with taking time and go over all the aspects of the agenda. Oh well.

The most interesting item was not listed on the published agenda and only became known during the superintendent's report. That is when the board learned that the previous temporary superintendent and the high school principal created a new one-year temporary position and hired an existing staff member to fill the new position. The new position is titled "Dean of Students" at the high school. A very impressive job title with a very vague list of duties. The position was posted from June 21 until June 28 and filled before the July 2 meeting. Who says bureaucracies are slow?

Several members of the board were upset about this, as they had no knowledge that this had been done. Especially after all of the budget issues that they have been working to solve. Yet the board seemed to feel that they had to accept the situation. Why?

At the very least the temporary superintendent and the high school principal should each have been given letters of reprimand for taking this action without the board's approval.

I can not help but wonder as to whom is in charge at the school district? The teachers and principals or the board? One thing is certain; they have some communication issues that need serious work.

The Sisters School District has been in existence for a long time and has never had a "Dean of Students" so my question is why do they even need one, let alone why do they need one now? The board should cancel this position, as it was issued without the prior approval of the board, and then issue the two letters of reprimand.

Dave Marlow