The War on Education

[darthtang aw]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3230141
We've had the "teaching to the test" argument. The problem with this mantra, is these standardized tests only cover certain curriculum, varying very little from year to year. So instead of teaching the information found in the recommended books, they grab versions of these standardized tests from previous years, and teach the kids how to answer the questions on the test based on these previous questions. Almost like memorizing answers to questions. You would be amazed at the number of kids out there that haven't been taught basic math skills - multiplication and division tables, basic math formulas, etc. Why? Because the teachers are spending all their time showing the kids which answer to select on these standarized tests. It's just like these Sylvan Learning Centers you send kids to so they can get higher scores on their ACT's and SAT's. Those places just drill the kids on the questions they know are on the test. It 's called repetitive training. I'll take a teacher any day that can take the state recommended book for their subject, and actually go through that book teaching the student based on the information contained in that book. Then allow the teacher to create a test based on the information he/she has taught, not what some principal has told him or her to test their students on.
So because the teachers are taking short cuts the system is bad? This is basically what you are saying. I disagree. Here is why.
My step daughter was placed in a charter school in first grade...1st and 2nd grade were hard as the school was new and in a constant state of flux as far as teachers go. But she was passing her "tests", come third grade I noticed she didn't understand some things she should. Couldn't explain how she reached certain answers...so I started volunteering ore in the school to get a grasp of what was going on. Well she passed the third grade BST. So thought all was well. 4th grade, same issue, couldn't problem solve well. atleast not to the level she should. multiplication was very difficult and so on.
I yanked her out half way through the year and placed her in one of the best charters in the city. The new school tested her to see where she was at. Basically she was at 2nd grade level. so my wife and I along with the teacher worked with her every day to get her caught up. basic 20 minute of math homework would take my poor daughter 4 hours to get done. Fast forward, she got caught up and passed the BST for the fourth grade at the new charter.Fast forward to fifth grade....she is ahead of her grade in mathematics and science at a 7th grade level. her writing is at the 6th grade level and she took second place in the school spelling bee (1st through 8th grade).
Now tell me.....where in my true story is the failure. Is it the system and the testing, or is it the teachers? Because both have to meet the same requirements for testing.

 

[reefraff]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3230141
We've had the "teaching to the test" argument. The problem with this mantra, is these standardized tests only cover certain curriculum, varying very little from year to year. So instead of teaching the information found in the recommended books, they grab versions of these standardized tests from previous years, and teach the kids how to answer the questions on the test based on these previous questions. Almost like memorizing answers to questions. You would be amazed at the number of kids out there that haven't been taught basic math skills - multiplication and division tables, basic math formulas, etc. Why? Because the teachers are spending all their time showing the kids which answer to select on these standarized tests. It's just like these Sylvan Learning Centers you send kids to so they can get higher scores on their ACT's and SAT's. Those places just drill the kids on the questions they know are on the test. It 's called repetitive training. I'll take a teacher any day that can take the state recommended book for their subject, and actually go through that book teaching the student based on the information contained in that book. Then allow the teacher to create a test based on the information he/she has taught, not what some principal has told him or her to test their students on.
I don't know what is so hard about all this. Come up with a basic standard of what kids should know on a given subject and test for it.
If a 3rd grader should know multiplication throw in half a dozen random questions. For English ask what a noun, verb, adjective is then have them write a sentence of their own making and highlight each. Unless the kids all use the same sentences it is pretty easy to tell if they know the subject.
I think you get the pointy headed intellectual types in DC getting involve and making this way harder than it needs to be.

 

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/3230149
Profound statement coming from a kid

The lack of respect kids show to adults is incredible. When I was a kid I would say my parents were pretty lenient. Even so if we had ever been caught smarting off to an adult, let along telling them where to go and what to do once they get there like a lot of kids today will do, we would have been beaten like a redheaded step child.
My kid was 12 when I met his mom. After we were married we had a come to Jesus meeting once he challenged me. I told him he could do as he was told because he loved me, respected me as an adult in a parental position or feared me but I was twice his size and he would do as I or his mother told him for one of the stated reasons. Then I let him breath again

Anyway after that we really did see eye to eye. Not to say he never pushed his luck or screwed up but when push came to shove he did what he was told.
Hey it is a kid saying that. Of course it is the lousy teachers.
Hey kid,
I jest a little, but take this completely seriously. You get out of school what you put into it. The system is made for dumb people with their thumb up their rear. So while you may that it is the teacher is at fault for the pupil not learning, the whole system isn't ideal for each individual pupil's learning it is an assembly line, where custom craftsmanship is required. So you have to take the prerogative and initiative to make up their shortcomings. It doesn't get any better in college. I have a very close friend who has a BA in Graphic Design, but still asks me to show her how to use the programs she went to school to use. (I have no "formal training") A grade may be nice keeps your parents off your back, but actually learning how to think and learning how to take initiative will put food on your plate.
And that is my deep thought of the day.

 

[scopus tang]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3230108
You need to come to San Antonio and teach. My school district, Northside Independent, pays teachers coming straight out of college with a BA $47,000/year to start, working a 187 days a year. For 15 years of experience, you'd make $52,239 with a BA.
http://www.nisd.net/hr/compensation/...WEB%202009.htm
While this may be true now, as national averages have gone up, it certainly wasn't true 15 years ago when I got into the business. And in all honesty, IMPO, $47,000 is not nearly enough to deal with the merit pay, testing issues, and bilingual issues that your state is currently dealing with. FYI, I'm making about that now; so you're saying that for 15 years, total salary increase is only about $5000 dollars? That equates out to a $333 raise per year (divide by 9 months; @ 40 hours per week, your yearly raise is 1.75 per week or about $.04 per hour). How many people in the business world are willing to work for a $.04 raise per year? That of course assumes only a 40 hour week, very few teachers that I know (at least the good teachers) work only 40 hours per week.
Originally Posted by DragonZim
http:///forum/post/3230109
Regardless of whether you choose to get paid for 9 months or 12 months of the year, you are still getting an ANNUAL salary. Around here, that salary is insanely high for the amount of work required versus the amount of time actually spent workingteaching.
Again, as an actual teacher I disagree with you. When I actually calculated the hours I worked as a beginning teacher over the course of a week, my salary came out below minimum wage. Now, that was 15 years ago, and times have changed, but there is a whole lot more that goes into teaching than the time that is seen at school. A good teacher not only teaches during the day, but s/he makes lesson plans at night, on weekends, and over vacations. S/he atttends trainings and workshops (often during the summer months, which s/he is not getting paid for). S/he also spends many hours grading papers and posting grades, and entering things into the computer. Additionally, many teachers spend as much as 10 to 20% of their salary on supplies for their own classroom, as in truth, education is woefully underfunded.
I know of very few businesses where you can carry vacation time over from year to year. Many places will pay you out at the end of the year if you dont use your time, but many others, if you dont use it, you lose it.
I know a few teachers and they ALL make exorbitantly high salaries. One in particular is an elementary school gym teacher who makes well in excess of 90K a year. Tell me how that can possibly be justifiable if it weren't for the damn teachers unions taking the tax payers over the coals?
I never said anything about carrying vacation time over from year to year; most private sector jobs add vacation days based on years of employments. Not talking about rolling over vacation here, I'm talking about individuals who get three months of paid vacation every year.
I guess we will have to agree to disagree. I know profession basketball players who make 6 and 7 figure incomes for playing a game, that IMO is exorbinant. I know buisiness and bank CEOs who make 6 and 7 figure incomes, who really do nothing but provide a figurehead, that IMO is exorbinant. I know managers of Burger King who make more than teachers do, is that exorbinant? I agree with you, that there are those who should earn what they do, but that is the nature of all jobs.

 

[scopus tang]

Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
http:///forum/post/3230119
I hear this all the time, but no one every explains why they do not benefit.
A national average of around 42,000 a year for 9.5 months is not to bad when you think about it. Especially when compared to the level of education needed to become a teacher.
Why is teaching to a test bad? Explain this to me. especially when the test is on math and other skills needed. If you didn't have this test coming up what would you teach instead? I hear this argument all the time. It is the single weakest argument I have ever heard. All teachers teach to a test. You teach the course than hold a test on what the course was about at the end. Your real issue is you don't create the test and therefore do not get to dictate what is taught. ALL teachers teach to a test...the difference is this time it isn't your test.
So you are telling me the average teacher's salary of 42,000 per year is actually paid out for LESS than 9.5 months of work. since you don't get paid for those holidays. So you work 8.5 months out of the year and make 42,000......I know a lot of people that would trade you.
I actually agree with you here. The system in my eyes is not the problem. It is the kids and the parents....not much can be learned from playing Halo for 3-6 hours a day....
Nope, I don't disagree $42,000 per year is not to bad, but realize that most people aren't making that based on a bachlors degree - in most cases, that takes additional education in addition to years of teaching experience.
As to why teaching to a test is bad, please see the explaination below. In a nutshell, Those who teach to tests are not educating youth, they are teaching students how to answer specific problems. Those same students often cannot think, cannot problem solve, and often lack many of the base skills. But that can answer certain types of questions any day of the week. This IMO is not educating.
Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/3230140
No offense intended to any teachers on the board but I really think some teachers should look at getting a job in the private sector if they think they have it so bad. If you look at the yearly salary, benefits and time off it is actually a pretty good gig. I realize all that time off isnt going to pay the bills but I know several people who went into teaching or at least working for the school district because it made it a lot easier to deal with their kids, having the same off time I mean. Saved them a lot on child care for younger kids and made it a little easier to keep track of the older ones.
As far as the union goes it is the unions that keep teaching a closed profession. If Bill Gates applied for a job teaching computer science in middle school he would be turned down. Thats just dumb.
I don't disagree that teaching isn't a bad gig to some degree, however, you all don't see all the issues, just as I don't see all the issues with your jobs. All the standarized education requirements that are basically BS, hours and hours spent not teaching or educating, but filling in paperwork so that it seems like we are.
And as far as teaching being closed, that has nothing to do with unions. That is determined by state government and individuals states teaching requirements. Unions don't set those rules, they are determined at a state and nation level.
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3230141
We've had the "teaching to the test" argument. The problem with this mantra, is these standardized tests only cover certain curriculum, varying very little from year to year. So instead of teaching the information found in the recommended books, they grab versions of these standardized tests from previous years, and teach the kids how to answer the questions on the test based on these previous questions. Almost like memorizing answers to questions. You would be amazed at the number of kids out there that haven't been taught basic math skills - multiplication and division tables, basic math formulas, etc. Why? Because the teachers are spending all their time showing the kids which answer to select on these standarized tests. It's just like these Sylvan Learning Centers you send kids to so they can get higher scores on their ACT's and SAT's. Those places just drill the kids on the questions they know are on the test. It 's called repetitive training. I'll take a teacher any day that can take the state recommended book for their subject, and actually go through that book teaching the student based on the information contained in that book. Then allow the teacher to create a test based on the information he/she has taught, not what some principal has told him or her to test their students on.
Ditto
Just my $.02 worth folks. Just as all of you have said; I think that those of you who actually aren't teachers should have to get a job working as a teacher - I promise you would be singing a different tune.

 

[reefraff]

Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/3230155
Hey it is a kid saying that. Of course it is the lousy teachers.
Hey kid,
I jest a little, but take this completely seriously. You get out of school what you put into it. The system is made for dumb people with their thumb up their rear. So while you may that it is the teacher is at fault for the pupil not learning, the whole system isn't ideal for each individual pupil's learning it is an assembly line, where custom craftsmanship is required. So you have to take the prerogative and initiative to make up their shortcomings. It doesn't get any better in college. I have a very close friend who has a BA in Graphic Design, but still asks me to show her how to use the programs she went to school to use. (I have no "formal training") A grade may be nice keeps your parents off your back, but actually learning how to think and learning how to take initiative will put food on your plate.
And that is my deep thought of the day.
MOST kids will just play the system and take the path of least resistance. In this case the kid hit the nail on the head when he said parents are the key here.
I totally agree on get what you can out of the system. I really hated school and never applied myself. I really screwed up by not taking advantage of school. I had a few displays of brilliance in school. If a teacher would PO me I would go for the good grade to rub their noses in it. Pulled off straight A's in science one year and A's and B's in the one year of math I had to take. You'd think the parents or guidance councilor would have noticed the high grades floating in a sea of D's and F's and figured out something was up.

 

[reefraff]

Originally Posted by Scopus Tang
http:///forum/post/3230171
I don't disagree that teaching isn't a bad gig to some degree, however, you all don't see all the issues, just as I don't see all the issues with your jobs. All the standarized education requirements that are basically BS, hours and hours spent not teaching or educating, but filling in paperwork so that it seems like we are.
And as far as teaching being closed, that has nothing to do with unions. That is determined by state government and individuals states teaching requirements. Unions don't set those rules, they are determined at a state and nation level.
It is the unions that have pressured the government for most of the education policies. They have also forced contracts on districts that like in most unionized professions makes it nearly impossible to fire the dead weight. It may not be that way in every state but I know teachers from both political persuasions in Montana and California and both sides seem to have issues that boiled down to the unions being a big part of the problem. Of course in California the biggest issue right now is will their last paycheck clear the bank

 

[darthtang aw]

Originally Posted by Scopus Tang
http:///forum/post/3230171
As to why teaching to a test is bad, please see the explaination below. In a nutshell, Those who teach to tests are not educating youth, they are teaching students how to answer specific problems. Those same students often cannot think, cannot problem solve, and often lack many of the base skills. But that can answer certain types of questions any day of the week. This IMO is not educating.

Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
http:///forum/post/3230152
So because the teachers are taking short cuts the system is bad? This is basically what you are saying. I disagree. Here is why.
My step daughter was placed in a charter school in first grade...1st and 2nd grade were hard as the school was new and in a constant state of flux as far as teachers go. But she was passing her "tests", come third grade I noticed she didn't understand some things she should. Couldn't explain how she reached certain answers...so I started volunteering ore in the school to get a grasp of what was going on. Well she passed the third grade BST. So thought all was well. 4th grade, same issue, couldn't problem solve well. atleast not to the level she should. multiplication was very difficult and so on.
I yanked her out half way through the year and placed her in one of the best charters in the city. The new school tested her to see where she was at. Basically she was at 2nd grade level. so my wife and I along with the teacher worked with her every day to get her caught up. basic 20 minute of math homework would take my poor daughter 4 hours to get done. Fast forward, she got caught up and passed the BST for the fourth grade at the new charter.Fast forward to fifth grade....she is ahead of her grade in mathematics and science at a 7th grade level. her writing is at the 6th grade level and she took second place in the school spelling bee (1st through 8th grade).
Now tell me.....where in my true story is the failure. Is it the system and the testing, or is it the teachers? Because both have to meet the same requirements for testing.

Originally Posted by Scopus Tang
http:///forum/post/3230171
And as far as teaching being closed, that has nothing to do with unions. That is determined by state government and individuals states teaching requirements. Unions don't set those rules, they are determined at a state and nation level.
Ah, but they do lobby the state politicians for these things...

 

[scopus tang]

Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/3230181
It is the unions that have pressured the government for most of the education policies. They have also forced contracts on districts that like in most unionized professions makes it nearly impossible to fire the dead weight. It may not be that way in every state but I know teachers from both political persuasions in Montana and California and both sides seem to have issues that boiled down to the unions being a big part of the problem. Of course in California the biggest issue right now is will their last paycheck clear the bank

Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
http:///forum/post/3230183
Ah, but they do lobby the state politicians for these things...
Hhhhmmm, you may or may not be right - since I'm not personally aware, I can't argue the point. But lets look at the end result. Right now, if I want to be a teacher, it takes 5 years at most colleges or universities to get a teaching degree in, say science. On the other hand, I can get a B.A. in science in four years, and be working in a lab earning a living in that 5th year, instead of racking up another year of students loans. I'm not really sure that that system can be called "benefiting the teacher."

 

[bionicarm]

Don't even get me into the "bilingual" issues we have here in San Antonio, and Texas in general. Anglo kids can't enroll into pre-K classes here because they are reserved for the ESL kids that can't even understand a word of English. There are twice as many openings for ESL teachers than there are for teachers to teach regular classes. You have kids in the middle and high schools that still can't speak English fluently. Their parents come over here from Mexico, and then continue speaking Spanish to their kids because they don't "want to lose their culture". Meanwhile, the teachers have kids thrown into their class that barely understand English, and they have to slow the rest of the class down so those kids don't fall behind.
As for the disparity in pay regarding years of teaching experience - That is one problematic issue our district has been facing the last several years. We're losing the experienced and quality teachers because there's no financial incentive for them to stay long-term, with the exception of the retirement benefits and pay. But then, there's not that many companies that are handing out raises these days with the economy the way it is. My wife has been a nurse for over 25 years, and she hasn't had a raise in the last four. I have some friends who've had to take pay cuts to keep their jobs. Just what happens when the economy goes down the tubes.

 

[darthtang aw]

Originally Posted by Scopus Tang
http:///forum/post/3230220
Hhhhmmm, you may or may not be right - since I'm not personally aware, I can't argue the point. But lets look at the end result. Right now, if I want to be a teacher, it takes 5 years at most colleges or universities to get a teaching degree in, say science. On the other hand, I can get a B.A. in science in four years, and be working in a lab earning a living in that 5th year, instead of racking up another year of students loans. I'm not really sure that that system can be called "benefiting the teacher."
This part I won't disagree with....
But I am not sure if this is an "educational system problem" or a "societal view" problem.....

 

[scopus tang]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3230241
Don't even get me into the "bilingual" issues we have here in San Antonio, and Texas in general. Anglo kids can't enroll into pre-K classes here because they are reserved for the ESL kids that can't even understand a word of English. There are twice as many openings for ESL teachers than there are for teachers to teach regular classes. You have kids in the middle and high schools that still can't speak English fluently. Their parents come over here from Mexico, and then continue speaking Spanish to their kids because they don't "want to lose their culture". Meanwhile, the teachers have kids thrown into their class that barely understand English, and they have to slow the rest of the class down so those kids don't fall behind.
As for the disparity in pay regarding years of teaching experience - That is one problematic issue our district has been facing the last several years. We're losing the experienced and quality teachers because there's no financial incentive for them to stay long-term, with the exception of the retirement benefits and pay. But then, there's not that many companies that are handing out raises these days with the economy the way it is. My wife has been a nurse for over 25 years, and she hasn't had a raise in the last four. I have some friends who've had to take pay cuts to keep their jobs. Just what happens when the economy goes down the tubes.
Yet another example of troubling economic times - up here, they can't find enough qualified nurses, so they are still giving raises - some places up till last year were still offering signing bonuses. Last week I saw someone advertising not only for a signing bonus, but also a nice check just for referring someone. Of course that was one of those speciality areas that nobody wants to work in.
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
http:///forum/post/3230242
This part I won't disagree with....
But I am not sure if this is an "educational system problem" or a "societal view" problem.....
nor am I, but regardless, it does make it much more difficult to get good individuals into the teaching field.

 

[darthtang aw]

Originally Posted by Scopus Tang
http:///forum/post/3230257
nor am I, but regardless, it does make it much more difficult to get good individuals into the teaching field.
True, but at the same point I have seen the union protect those that should be drummed out of the field. Maybe if we cleaned out the bad and paid the good more, the system would right itself...As it sits now, the unions allow to many bad employees to remain at their jobs.
why do teachers need a union anyway? what is the benefit to the teachers as a whole?

 

[scopus tang]

Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
http:///forum/post/3230271
True, but at the same point I have seen the union protect those that should be drummed out of the field. Maybe if we cleaned out the bad and paid the good more, the system would right itself...As it sits now, the unions allow to many bad employees to remain at their jobs.
why do teachers need a union anyway? what is the benefit to the teachers as a whole?
Perhaps, but in my experience, its not union protection that keeps the incompetent in the job, but rather is the incompetence of those in administration. If administrators actually do what they are paid to do, and know their teachers, they are able to dot their tees and cross their i's, and get rid of the dead weight. Unfortunately, most administrators don't; because they are too busy jumping through political hoops from programs like "No Child Left Behind" or because they simply don't bother. Then when there is a bad teacher, they either don't know or complain about how hard it is to get rid of them.
As to why we need a union - teachers unions were formed for the same reasons that many unions were formed in this country. To protect the interests of teachers and to improve job conditions. Primarily today, they are a political body (as was stated). They do still provide some benefit. Take for example standardized tests; the state decides that tests on basic curriculum is going to be given during certain years (i.e. maybe 3rd, 5th, 7th, and 10th grade). These tests, test not only the curriculum that the current teacher is teaching, but also the curriculum that was taught in previous years. In some states when standarized testing was put in place, there was a drive to hold the individual teacher responsible for the standardized test results of his or her students (both current and previous years education). How fair is that? Unions across the nation stood up to that and said no way. FYI, most merit pay systems function with this same mentality - if your students perform well on the test, you get a raise, if not, we're going to talk about putting you on an improvement plan to improve what you are teaching (never mind the two or three years of previous education that occured - you are the one responsible). So I guess they do provide some benefit. They also are a bit of watchdog to ensure that some new money goes to things like salary instead of pet projects of the superintendent and principle - and then they claim there is no money for salary increases, because the economy is down and we have to improve education. Keep in mind that programs like "Reading Recovery" and "Math Recovery" aren't actually shown to improve education (there is no documentation to show that these programs improve math and reading scores long term), but they are extremely expensive programs to put in place and require lots of extra personel. They also provide legal representation; imagine the costs of fitting a case of "sexual harassment", because some 8th grade girl gets angry with you because you won't give her credit on a late paper and claims that you touched her inappropriately or looked up her dress or whatever. Unfortunately, these things do happen. I'm not personally all that fond of unions, I don't like the fact that I pay big dues for minimal representation and most of my money goes for lobby on issues that I don't necessarily agree with. If I had my choice, I wouldn't be part of the national or state union, and would just be part of the local union, but by law you can't do that.

 

[sickboy]

Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/3230094
I don't know, there aren't tons of sectors where you get a week off and christmas, a couple months off during the summer, plus spring and fall break. Then make 40k plus right out of college...
Entry level stuff in the corporate world just doesn't compete with a school teacher's salary...
I don't know how many teachers you know, but I know my wife doesn't only work during the week, 8-3:30 for 10 months out of the year. She is always spending her nights & weekends grading and planning. They also have to prep for classes while on summer breaks as they don't get paid to do that, as in it is not part of their salary and they are not allotted time to do it. Overall, she works much harder than I do. I go in and leave 8 hours later, I don't bring any work with me.

 

[pezenfuego]

I think that people (especially students) belittle the amount of work teachers have to do.
I couldn't imagine reading 40+ papers that have to do with one specific subject. Redundancy leads to insanity.

 

[uneverno]

Originally Posted by PEZenfuego
http:///forum/post/3230574
I couldn't imagine reading 40+ papers that have to do with one specific subject. Redundancy leads to insanity.
¿Que? Redundancy also prevents catastrophic system failure.
Non-sequitur. I fail to grasp the logical correlation between concepts A and B.

 

[pezenfuego]

Originally Posted by uneverno
http:///forum/post/3230599
¿Que? Redundancy also prevents catastrophic system failure.
Non-sequitur. I fail to grasp the logical correlation between concepts A and B.
Why?
I'm sharing my opinion. You can disagree all you want, just don't package your response as if my opinion is wrong.
People could say that teachers do very little work and they wouldn't be wrong. Everything is relative.
If you are going to badger me, do it in another thread.

 

[darthtang aw]

Originally Posted by PEZenfuego
http:///forum/post/3230716
Why?
I'm sharing my opinion. You can disagree all you want, just don't package your response as if my opinion is wrong.
People could say that teachers do very little work and they wouldn't be wrong. Everything is relative.
If you are going to badger me, do it in another thread.
You are also involved in a debate. The purpose of debate is the exchange of ideas and often to disagree. Even so far as to state the other person is wrong. If you can't handle being told someone thinks you are wrong, don't start these discussions and stick to ice cream vs. yogurt debates.
uneveno was stating redundancy doesn't lead to insanity...that was all. a cup of coffee in the morning every day for 40 years is redundant...does that make the person insane?

 

[bionicarm]

Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
http:///forum/post/3230794
You are also involved in a debate. The purpose of debate is the exchange of ideas and often to disagree. Even so far as to state the other person is wrong. If you can't handle being told someone thinks you are wrong, don't start these discussions and stick to ice cream vs. yogurt debates.
uneveno was stating redundancy doesn't lead to insanity...that was all. a cup of coffee in the morning every day for 40 years is redundant...does that make the person insane?
Actually, I think the problem is he used the wrong word to make his point. The definition of redundant is repetitiveness of expressing one's ideas, not specific tasks. Now if he would've replaced the word 'redundancy' with the word 'repetitiveness', then his argument and statement would make more sense. I would agree that most teacher's probably don't care for the tedious task of grading the same droll English paper 40+ times in a single night. If I had to do it, it would probably drive me insane.