 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
.2 OUT-OF-POCKET EXPENSES
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------It irritates me that teachers have to buy personal supplies for their classroom out of their own money. One of our interns, who was teaching 2nd grade, needed to get some supplies. The intern spent $50 when her salary was only $8,000 per year! On a limited salary, $50 is worth a great deal more. I don't think that teachers should have to fork out the money for their classroom supplies. There should be provisions for teachers to be reimbursed for supplies that they have purchase. However, that's not the system.
Teachers should expect staff development to take place on the job. Teachers have no expectations that they're going to have any kind of systematic staff development on the job. For example, how many teachers would ever expect to be able to take their courses and degrees on duty time? No way! You go on for your advanced degree in the summer or in the evenings. Most of which you pay for yourself. It's definitely on your own time. There's something wrong with that. Go back to what we were talking about earlier, teachers need to be upgraded in their ability to know and teach technology. If you take that seriously, then it's the school's responsibility to provide the in-service staff development time. If my dream world existed, every teacher would have three weeks per year of full time duty geared for in-service education. Three weeks a year for your staff development is a lot of time. Probably not enough, but that would be a great starting point. This development would consist of one week each of methodology, new content, and technology.
 |
What would be one of the advantages of having a systematic approach to staff development? | |
 |
No Ferret Question
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |