Are You Obese? Then you can't teach!!!

from JoeUser Forums
Link

OK, so this seems to be my topic of the day, so I might as well just go with it.

There has been legislation introduced in Hawaii that would have mandatory "weigh-ins" for teachers, imposing weight loss provisions if the teachers are found to be obese. The logic behind this is that children cannot be expected to take weight loss initiatives seriously if their teachers are obese.

It's a valiant measure, and I'm sure that whoever came up with it had nothing but good faith in their hearts when they came up with this idea. However, it is horribly flawed, isn't it? The obvious argument about infringement on personal freedoms is actually mentioned by the legislator who proposed the bill, saying that this "should start at the home." That is, forcing parents to lose weight so that their children won't be obese either? Do I even need to argue against this? Why not force parents to stop smoking, or drinking? Why not do the same for teachers?

The bottom line is that your physical appearance, your decision to have a beer with friends on the weekend, or your decision to blacken your lungs and send yourself down a cancerous road do not diminish your abilities as a teacher. With the shortage of teachers as it is, and the much too prevalent sub-par quality of the teachers we do have, does it really benefit us to start weeding them out based on how much they weigh?
2,706 views 15 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top
I can see both sides as being somewhat correct. You can have all the fat teachers you want, but don't let them be teaching and preaching to their students about good eating diets and whatnot. Kids aren't stupid and they'll treat it like a joke.
Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top
I can see both sides as being somewhat correct. You can have all the fat teachers you want, but don't let them be teaching and preaching to their students about good eating diets and whatnot. Kids aren't stupid and they'll treat it like a joke


Unless you are a physical education or a health teacher, I don't see it as your place to be advocating any kind of diet or lifestyle, and even then, teachers should only give information, not endorsements.
WindowBlinds - Free yourself of the default settings, customize your desktop.
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top
Remember on The Nutty Professor where Sherman erased the chalk board with his gut?

Yeah.



Seriously, though, this is the first I've heard of this, and I live in Hawaii. Crazy. The government is really getting after fat people (and fat kids, too), ain't it?
Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top
A long time ago, teachers were not allowed to marry because school boards did not want to have to get into "the birds & the bees" issues with kids when their teachers got pregnant. Apparently we've fallen through the stupid bush again!!

So far we let teachers teach math, who have never been trained to teach math; we let coaches teach history and government, having no idea what they are doing; and we can all think of at least one shop teacher with a missing finger.

I think if we are going to start expecting a standard from our teachers, it should be that they have the ability to TEACH!! Apparently that seems unreasonable though, so expecting them to keep a standard of weight is completely idiotic.
Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top
You can't expect teachers to teach until the teaching profession gets a better reputation. If a child is good in math, s/he is not encouraged to teach, but to get a "real" job that pays better. The cliche' "Those who can't do, teach." has become the motto of the education system. Better pay and more respect, from EVERYONE (that means students, parents and other adult-type people) and you'll get better teachers.

But hey, that's just my hill-o-beans. Back to the subject:

Since teachers are now expected to give moral education to students, they might as well be responsible for their weight as well. But wait, what about those teachers who have a condition that causes weight gain or makes weight loss very difficult. (I'm thinking hypothyroidism... even with meds, weight loss is an extra pain) Are there provisions for this?
Reply #6 from JoeUser Forums Top
You can't expect teachers to teach until the teaching profession gets a better reputation. If a child is good in math, s/he is not encouraged to teach, but to get a "real" job that pays better. The cliche' "Those who can't do, teach." has become the motto of the education system. Better pay and more respect, from EVERYONE (that means students, parents and other adult-type people) and you'll get better teachers.


As long as a teacher is accepting a paycheck to teach a subject, I expect not only a high degree of competence in the subject, I expect a high degree of competence to teach. It is hypocritical of a teacher to accept a paycheck, then say "but I don't get respect, so I shouldn't have to..."

The level of competence I expect from EVERYONE is the level of competence I was held to as a parachute rigger and paramedic. Anything less is just an excuse.http://parated2k.joeuser.com/index.asp?AID=63499

That being said. Yes, I do think that competent teachers are among the most important assets to any community. When I am impressed with any of my kids' teachers I make it a point to let them know how much I do appreciate them. I think that good teachers should be paid better than administrators. Futhermore, I think teachers should be among the highest paid employees of a city or county. There is no substitute for a great teacher, and no local government employee should ever feel that they are more valuable to the community that good teachers.

On the other hand, incompetent teachers should be thrown out on their butts!!!!

No teacher, however, should be held to a mindlessly innane "weight" standard.
Reply #7 from JoeUser Forums Top
As long as a teacher is accepting a paycheck to teach a subject, I expect not only a high degree of competence in the subject, I expect a high degree of competence to teach. It is hypocritical of a teacher to accept a paycheck, then say "but I don't get respect, so I shouldn't have to..."


I'm sorry, I wasn't clear enough. I was saying if there was better pay, you would attract a better quality of people into the teaching profession, not that lousy teachers would teach better for more money.
Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top
As a future teacher I must say I disagree with Sugar High and Para. I think teachers should remain underpaid. Believe it or not this is not me being ironic as usual. I have seen a lot of older women teachers who have no enthusiasm for their jobs. They got into the job back when teaching was a well-paid job for women, one of the best. Keeping low pay means you get people who want to do the job for the sake of the job.

Phil, in Australia, we have too many teachers (though too few men). Would you support this measure in Australia, where we have one of the highest levels of obesity?

I wouldn't. A fat teacher might be able to relate the problems they have to the students. Teachers should however be encouraged to drop weight.

But what next? Giving us morality tests to make sure we can teach SOSE? Checking we've had sex before allowing us to do sex ed? Only letting black people do history of African slaves?
Reply #9 from JoeUser Forums Top
Seriously, though, this is the first I've heard of this, and I live in Hawaii. Crazy. The government is really getting after fat people (and fat kids, too), ain't it?


Yeah, and it's kind of alarming. Being fat does not mean inactive or lazy. It's not something that should be taken to mean that one does nothing but eat and watch Springer all day.

I think if we are going to start expecting a standard from our teachers, it should be that they have the ability to TEACH!!


Yeah, pretty much, which is why I'm going back into the seventh circle of hell to be a high school English teacher. While I'm glad I learned to write from my history teacher, it's disconcerting how little my English teachers seemed to know about the subject if they weren't specifically teaching a writing course.

I have seen a lot of older women teachers who have no enthusiasm for their jobs. They got into the job back when teaching was a well-paid job for women, one of the best. Keeping low pay means you get people who want to do the job for the sake of the job.


There is always the danger of losing your passion for whatever it is that you do, regardless of the money you make. I know of many teachers who reach tenure and then completely dismiss all of their duties. However, keeping salaries low for teachers will discourage even those that are passionate if they can't feel that they can do what they want and live a comfortable life.

Phil, in Australia, we have too many teachers (though too few men). Would you support this measure in Australia, where we have one of the highest levels of obesity?


I wouldn't either. I think it's absurd to prevent someone from teaching based on something that doesn't affect their ability to teach.

The cliche' "Those who can't do, teach." has become the motto of the education system. Better pay and more respect, from EVERYONE (that means students, parents and other adult-type people) and you'll get better teachers.


I have to wonder how many teachers actually want to be, but just become disillusioned. As I mentioned, I don't think anyone decides to become a teacher for the money. Consequently, they must actually want to enlighten young minds. Everyone has a breaking point, however, and constant abuse coupled with little praise will break anyone eventually.

Then again, we cannot discount the teachers that are simply not cut out for it, nor those that are in it for research opportunities or to rise to administrative greatness.

Reply #10 from JoeUser Forums Top
Keeping low pay means you get people who want to do the job for the sake of the job.


There is a lot of logic to that. Unfortunately low pay also keeps incompetent teachers in the system, since they aren't able to do anything else either.
Reply #11 from JoeUser Forums Top
Teacher pay in a lot of areas is out of whack with the cost of living. Here in CT, it's damn hard to support yourself, let alone a family on a teacher's salary. Forcing low wages does not discourage the opportunists who are in it for the money so much as it discourages anyone who wants to have a decent standard of living. I know very few people who love whatever it is they do so much that they would take a job that paid much less than it cost them to live. Those willing to work for no pay in bad conditions tend to go to the Peace Corps or something like that.

Simple economics comes into play here. You have to make the field attractive to prospectives. The idea that people who love to teach will come regardless of money is honestly a load of crap. Sure you'll get a few, but you'll get far more who simply aren't qualified enough in other areas to get higher paying jobs. If the private sector pays so much more for the same skill and knowledge set, then yes, you will see the "Those who can't do, teach" saying become increasingly true.

Lets look at what I do. I'm an IT guy for a large company. I have a 4 year degree and I've just entered the workforce (Graduated Dec '03). My degree cost me roughly $15,000 thanks to financial aid. My starting salary (to match the ridiculous cost of living in CT) is $50k. To teach technology in a public school here in CT, I'd make roughly $26k to start, with a career cap likely around $60k. Not to mention all the extra money I'd have to spend on further education and certification. Tell me, what incentive is there for me to become a teacher?
Reply #12 from JoeUser Forums Top
lol but here in my state, I started a "dicipline" that included running, and push ups, mountian climbers, flutter kicks etc.. and was recently told , that ANY punishment that might make a young teenage child SORE was cruel and innappropriate. so, when my 13 yo son wants to stand toe to toe with me, and I tell him to run 5 laps, to the barn and back ttling .10 of a mile, is innappropriate and abusive dicipline... it allowed him to blow off steam, me too... but the state became involved and advised me to spank him instead. I would think , running , exercising , teaches him a creative way to deal with anger, fustration, thought, reflection etc... but no, I should hit him to teach him what ??? violence will fix it better ... oh I live in NC ... it is also illegal to send a kid to bed without supper..AND to wash a mouth out with soap.
Reply #13 from JoeUser Forums Top
Keeping low pay means you get people who want to do the job for the sake of the job.


Sure, we'll have people who do the job for the sake of the job, but are they necessarily the best people?
Reply #14 from JoeUser Forums Top
I'm an obese teacher. Part of its my own fault I suppose, but part of it is a hormone imbalance and the fact that my body produces more insulin than it needs and that creates problems, too.

I think I'd be more concerned if a teacher was moonlighting as a prostitute, selling smack to make a few extra bucks, or screwing a second grader behind the supply cabinet for kicks.

My weight issue doesn't allow me to be as physical with my kids as I'd probably be...i.e. playing with them during recess, etc. I also don't have as much energy as my thinner colleagues. But those are really the only two issues I see with obesity in the classroom.

Maybe someone should talk about this issue with the military or something, where its more of a safety issue to be obese.
Reply #15 from JoeUser Forums Top
that ANY punishment that might make a young teenage child SORE was cruel and innappropriate. so, when my 13 yo son wants to stand toe to toe with me, and I tell him to run 5 laps, to the barn and back ttling .10 of a mile, is innappropriate and abusive dicipline... it allowed him to blow off steam, me too... but the state became involved and advised me to spank him instead. I would think , running , exercising , teaches him a creative way to deal with anger, fustration, thought, reflection etc... but no, I should hit him to teach him what ??? violence will fix it better ... oh I live in NC ...


How does hitting not make a child sore?

it is also illegal to send a kid to bed without supper..AND to wash a mouth out with soap.


Do people actually literally wash their childrens mouths out with soap...I would find a tad objectionable...certainly not enough to require a law for it, but I don't see why anyone who's had this happen couldn't bring a lawsuit if they so chose. As for not having dinner...I wouldn't do it to my kids, but it aint gonna kill them.