kitchen table math, the sequel: how the unions lost the media, part 2

Friday, August 20, 2010

how the unions lost the media, part 2

Union leader calls on L.A. teachers to boycott Times




part 1
Posted by at

8 comments:

Catherine Johnson said...

Do other unions (in other areas of employment) have a better understanding of public relations?

August 20, 2010 at 12:36 PM
Anonymous said...

Catherine, some do. But in the world of collective bargaining, there's just the reality that it's somewhat dangerous to be an outlier. And, in the realm of evaluation of the workers' performance,teachers up until now have been outliers -- there has been no recognized way to compare performance, or even dismiss total incompetents. Teachers are rightly upset that the public wants to judge them based on outocmes over which they have very limited control -- and let's be honest, there are no occupations I can think of where that is so blatantly true -- but they are being drawn inexorably into a world where taxpayers and parents will insist on some level of accountability including test results.

August 20, 2010 at 1:36 PM
Catherine Johnson said...

Hi anonymous!

I would ***hate*** to be featured in the paper, by name, with my photo (!), as an ineffective teacher.

In this post, though, I'm thinking about the way in which the union presents itself to the public as well as to the media that covers it.

Calling for a boycott of a newspaper and allowing such a photograph to be the 'face' of the teacher's union ---- wow.

That's not a friendly face.

A couple of years ago, an attorney for a state school board association told me that school boards typically get no training in public relations at all, and that's what I think we see in public education across the board.

In so many cases, public education doesn't seem to having itself as having a public.

August 20, 2010 at 2:05 PM
Catherine Johnson said...

Another example of public education not experiencing itself as having a public: the WSJ ran a story on affluent parents in Manhattan suing to have their SPED kids educated privately.

In the story, a SPED official objects to the situation on grounds that the money spent on tuition for SPED students "could save or create jobs for nearly 1,200 teachers."

Even if that's the way you think, that's not something to say to a reporter.

The line to a reporter should be: effective education first, last, and always.

Not "jobs saved or created for 1000 teachers."

Wealthy Seek Special-Ed Cash
by Barbara Martinez
August 18, 2010

August 20, 2010 at 2:10 PM
Anonymous said...

"Teachers are rightly upset that the public wants to judge them based on outcomes over which they have very limited control..."

Fair enough up to a point, but if this is true, then the arguments lobbying for higher teacher pay are weakened quite a bit. If the teachers have very little control over the outcome, then my inclination is to go for lower wage teachers and spend the money elsewhere...


-Mark Roulo

August 20, 2010 at 2:46 PM
Catherine Johnson said...

Fair enough up to a point, but if this is true, then the arguments lobbying for higher teacher pay are weakened quite a bit.

Exactly.

Of course, I would like to see a big color photograph of teacher 'John Smith's' building principal on the LA Times web site, too.

August 20, 2010 at 2:52 PM
Catherine Johnson said...

oops - correction: the photo was taken by the LA Times

nevertheless, a publicist would advise on clothing and facial expression

August 20, 2010 at 4:32 PM
Anonymous said...

Good point, Mark and Catherine. However, even if there is much that is not under the control of teachers, what is under their control matters a lot, and is difficult to master. Plus, the working conditions . . . having been a teacher, many years ago, there has never been any other job I've done that came anywher close to the difficulty of teaching well.

August 20, 2010 at 4:46 PM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)