People would typically pay $2,500 to the scheme’s fixer, who would bribe test officials and have proxies take their certification tests, prosecutors said.

Five people have been charged in Texas with organizing and participating in an illegal cheating scheme that certified more than 200 unqualified teachers and helped the plot’s “kingpin” rake in more than $1 million, prosecutors said.

In the scheme, people would typically pay $2,500 to have proxies take certification tests for them at two testing centers in Houston. The scandal involved bribing a testing proctor to allow test applicants and their proxies to switch places, Harris County District Attorney Kim Ogg said at a news conference Monday.

  • WalrusDragonOnABike [they/them]@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    15 days ago

    If it paid better, wouldn’t more people try to bribe their way into the job? Granted, they’re have more real competition for the jobs, so just getting certified might not be good enough to get a job.

    • thefartographer@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      15 days ago

      No, because if it paid more, the sector wouldn’t be as flooded with middling underperformers. No joke, I knew a young lady around 10 years ago who studied education because “it’s an easy degree and they help shove you through because the bar is so low. No one wants to be paid so little to do so much. But if you can make it through your first two years, it’s almost impossible to fire you for anything that isn’t related to sex or violence.”

      Her first week as an actual teacher in her own classroom with her own students, she kept posting her daily lesson notes from her whiteboard on Facebook. It only lasted a week because she got tired of everyone correcting her spelling and dates. She was a history teacher…

      ETA: Don’t get me wrong, I 100% support public education to the point that I’ve dedicated the past decade of my life to working in public education even though I find kids incredibly overwhelming. That being said, I can support something and still point out that it’s broken.

      • pearsaltchocolatebar@discuss.online
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        15 days ago

        That 2 year thing is not true. Maybe if you’re a tenured professor, but other than that they can just choose not to renew your contract for the next year.

        • thefartographer@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          15 days ago

          I didn’t say she was smart or right. In fact, that’s kinda the point. These are the types of candidates flooding interviews sometimes.

          • pearsaltchocolatebar@discuss.online
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            12 days ago

            Not really. The union can’t force the district to renew a contract. They can only protect against firing the employee.

            Schools likely won’t fire teachers unless they have to because they usually have to pay out the remainder of the contract.

      • WalrusDragonOnABike [they/them]@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        15 days ago

        Why would middling underperformers be willing to pay $1000’s for a job that pays worse than for the same job but paying more? You think that lady would have said “no, I don’t want this job anymore because the pay increased”?