RM>RL>In '92 they hired over 150 teachers, the following year 12! All because
  >RL>of government budget cuts. Now they hire more but not from a teaching
  >RL>pool.
RM>What happened to the "pool"?  This type of thing is cyclic,
  >and there were a lot of teaching candidates, for example,
  >in the early 70's when the last financial crunch took place.
I should have made myself a little clearer. They used to hire a pile of
new teachers - the pool - and then place them. They would hire a number
according to the number that they anticipated they would need...now this
is elementary level. (High school teachers are hired through the
Principals only.)
So there would be no "pool" left by September - all teachers would be
placed.
  >At that time, districts could pick and choose in all areas.
  >In the 80's, however, word was out, and there were a lot
  >less teaching candidates graduating.  At the same time, a
  >lot of the existing candidates went into other fields.  Now
  >we're swinging around again to the 70's situation.  I guess
  >it's going to vary from one area to another...
Is it high school teachers that you need or all divisions?
When I started my teachers training in '88 I was told that when I
graduated in '92 (concurrent BA BEd program) I would have no trouble
getting a job as they anticipated a lot of retirees. However, the budget
cuts meant that retiring teachers were not replaced. Consequently class
size has mushroomed, support staff has dwindled and special needs
classes have not grown as needed. That together with the growing number
of ESL children in the system has created a lot more work for teachers.
In addition, we are consequently going through many changes to do with
new report cards and accountability. All changes are good but it means
added responsibility for an already overwhelmed teaching staff.
                                -Ruth
---
 þ QMPro 1.53 þ I tried to drown my problems but they can swim.
---------------