#183: - Survey is not a vote

I'm not sure why you are talking about a lesson in civilty.  If any lesson should be taught, it should be about people who are voted in to office not following the wishes of their constituency.  That lesson is about democratic republics. Why did you bring up the point about the calendar that was in place last year at this time, before the change?  It is 2011.  People feel differently. Are you on the right message board?

#184: Guest - Re: Survey is not a vote

I have witnessed some very unprofessional behavior by other teachers in my building over this issue.  I guess you have not, and for that, I am glad.

I am aware of many "irregularities" in the survey process, and I am just one person.  My point is, I don't think the survey results are reliable.

I brought up the previously voted upon calendar for 10-11 because I have heard many people talking about the board voting on a calendar for three years and that they should keep it for three years because it was voted that way.  If that is the case, we should not have had the balanced calendar for 10-11 because we already had a voted upon and published calendar for 10-11.

If I were on the board, I would not have changed the calendar for the 11-12 year, nor would I have tackled the question at this time.  I would have waited until August or September, when we had had an entire year of the balanced calendar so we could evaluate it.  I would have left 11-12 as balanced, but give ample notice that the 12-13 calendar was yet to be determined.

I was not surprised by the outcome of the board vote, as each of the four who voted in favor of the later start date have all stated their position on this.  To have voted otherwise would have had them branded as "flip floppers" and that didn't work out so well for Crooks and Abraham.  The survey was not the vote - election day was the vote.  If we want a true picture, let's use the voting booth and put the calendar question to a vote.

Do we know why the four who voted for the later start date voted that way?  I believe a major factor was cost savings.  I would gladly start later if it meant more teachers kept their jobs and we had smaller class sizes.

I clicked on the discussion tab of this site because I thought it was a discussion board, not just a rant board.  Can we not look at both sides of the issue or are we just interested in hearing from others who agree with us?