The Education Policy Thread

[saysmydoctor]

Let's talk wonkish Education policy. After healthcare and energy, this will probably be the next arena Obama will need to work in.

Some websites that you should all follow:
http://www.eduwonk.com/
http://d-edreckoning.blogspot.com/
http://educationpolicyblog.blogspot.com/
http://www.edweek.org/ew/section/blogs/index.html

And go.

[Susanna]

A dramatic shift of both policy and overall views of the importance of education is much needed. In addition to the obvious urge for a funding increase, I would also love to see the removal of the unneccesarily constrictive state enforced curriculum and intense focus on state-wide tests. While a child's educational journey should have some broad structure, the focus should never be on passing relatively arbitrary state mandated tests.

[loveisdead]

A dramatic shift of both policy and overall views of the importance of education is much needed. In addition to the obvious urge for a funding increase, I would also love to see the removal of the unneccesarily constrictive state enforced curriculum and intense focus on state-wide tests. While a child's educational journey should have some broad structure, the focus should never be on passing relatively arbitrary state mandated tests.
Agree with every last bit of this.

[Susanna]

Agree with every last bit of this.
In Washington we have a test called the WASL which is administered during 4th, 7th, and 10th grades. It is a week long test for which the teachers are required to base the majority of their year-long curriculum on. It then became somewhat of an exit exam for all public high school students. The theory being that it would assess their basic academic abilities. There were a large percentage of 10th graders who failed the test and when the policy makers saw the results, they did not reevaluate the exam nor did they provide extra support for struggling schools, instead they said the kids could take it as many times necessary to pass. So the state thinks that the primary focus of the classroom should be directed on an exam that ultimately serves no purpose? The failed logic is baffling. How about instead of putting money into making, printing, administering, and grading these tests, the money is refocused to provide various unmet necessities in the schools themselves?

[saysmydoctor]

A dramatic shift of both policy and overall views of the importance of education is much needed. In addition to the obvious urge for a funding increase, I would also love to see the removal of the unneccesarily constrictive state enforced curriculum and intense focus on state-wide tests. While a child's educational journey should have some broad structure, the focus should never be on passing relatively arbitrary state mandated tests.
I take issue with saying it's a funding issue when country can do more with less. Per capita, the US spends more and gets less out of it. France, Britain, etc, all spend less on their education systems. With that being said, I guess the increased cost in education in the US stems from the fact that the states each run their own public higher education systems, which they receive money from the government. You don't see this in these other nations.

So I question the urgency of funding without first figuring out what is structurally wrong with the system.

[Susanna]

I take issue with saying it's a funding issue when country can do more with less. Per capita, the US spends more and gets less out of it. France, Britain, etc, all spend less on their education systems. With that being said, I guess the increased cost in education in the US stems from the fact that the states each run their own public higher education systems, which they receive money from the government. You don't see this in these other nations.

So I question the urgency of funding without first figuring out what is structurally wrong with the system.
While I understand what you're saying, funding spans beyond simply directly assisting districts. It also applies to simply investing more time and including more people in the process of properly determining the next step in improving the system. Simply doing that requires a larger allowance. I still believe that at this point in time, the schools DO need more funding. Finding solutions to such a deep issue takes time, give the schools a step up in the mean time. Withholding funding in the time it takes to discover a beneficial plan of action will only allow systems such as the California public universities to fall deeper and deeper into problems. Funding might simply be a bandaid but when the system is bleeding to death, its necessary.

[Baby for Pree]

More money isn't what we need; it's a restructuring of how we spend the money we have. In Charlotte, a lot of the poorest schools have really nice technology in the classrooms, but no talented teachers. One of my ideas is to give bonuses to teachers who teach in lower SES areas. That will encourage future educators to get the training necessary to succeed in these schools.

Also, every state should have a Teaching Fellows program. It's one of the few good things I see in NC's education system.

[saysmydoctor]

While I understand what you're saying, funding spans beyond simply directly assisting districts. It also applies to simply investing more time and including more people in the process of properly determining the next step in improving the system. Simply doing that requires a larger allowance. I still believe that at this point in time, the schools DO need more funding. Finding solutions to such a deep issue takes time, give the schools a step up in the mean time. Withholding funding in the time it takes to discover a beneficial plan of action will only allow systems such as the California public universities to fall deeper and deeper into problems. Funding might simply be a bandaid but when the system is bleeding to death, its necessary.
But the funding leads to a direct dependence on the government from the school districts. It's the same philosophy of bailing out Wall Street without putting in place conditions to allow the same scenario to arise again. It's a waste of money.

Structural reform would cheapen the system entirely overtime. Take K-12 away from the states and put it under a centralized authority, the Department of Education, and implement the proper curriculum, with an obvious regional apparatus in place. The first thing this handles? An uneven curriculum. Kids are coming out of two schools in the same district on different levels and different learned material. School systems need to account for the fact that there are kids that learn at different levels and we need to create a fabric that benefits every student as best as possible. Faster-paced classrooms, lower ones, average ones, etc. Instead of these rigorous tests, put in place year-end tests that focus on application rather than comprehension. Comprehension testing should be taking place through out the school year. A kid shouldn't find out at the end of the year that he never really understood any of it. That's already too late for him, you understand.

I just question a "schools need more funding" blanket philosophy without really addressing the problem. Schools need more funding because they are overloaded with Administrative staff and such. A structural reform would remedy this. Implementing a new kind of system of schooling, multi-track variety year-round institutions would lessen the costs on constructing new schools and therefore on new locations that need to be handled with some sort of administrative faculty.

The healthcare problem is not unlike the education one. The system has been broken for long and we've just been putting more and more 'bandaids' on it and in reality it's just letting the infection fester.

[Neo Cassady]

I didn't realize how poor the education system in this country is until I became a teacher. Schools are overtested and underfunded, and said funding is based on entirely the wrong things. Case in point: last week was a state-wide "count week"--basically a census that helps determine the amount of funding the districts receive. Big surprise, kids came in when they were sick, and this week 20% of the school is absent. I'm rushing around trying to get the required tests made up by the end of the day Monday, when grades are due, because the numbers are all that matter. In fact, the district has in place a policy that requires we give kids a minimum of 50% on their grade cards, even if they earned well below that. Kids ask why we're spending lots of time on certain things and rushing through others that they see as more engaging and useful, and I have no better answer than "that's what's on the test". Continuous Improvement is a misnomer, as all slapping that label on a school does is force it to cut corners and focus on nothing but the numbers.

Obama does need to work on this; social issues aside it's why I voted for him. But it's a cooperative between the government and community. Levies for important things (e.g., new books and buses) are failing, and those for the less important (e.g., a new football stadium--not to discount athletics but, if the state is going to place so much emphasis on testing, academics needs to be the top priority) pass. The vast majority of parents who conference with their children's teachers and are involved in the schools are those whose children are already succeeding. That type of thing can't be solved with a signature and a bailout.

[Baby for Pree]

I didn't realize how poor the education system in this country is until I became a teacher. Schools are overtested and underfunded, and said funding is based on entirely the wrong things. Case in point: last week was a state-wide "count week"--basically a census that helps determine the amount of funding the districts receive. Big surprise, kids came in when they were sick, and this week 20% of the school is absent. I'm rushing around trying to get the required tests made up by the end of the day Monday, when grades are due, because the numbers are all that matter. In fact, the district has in place a policy that requires we give kids a minimum of 50% on their grade cards, even if they earned well below that. Kids ask why we're spending lots of time on certain things and rushing through others that they see as more engaging and useful, and I have no better answer than "that's what's on the test". Continuous Improvement is a misnomer, as all slapping that label on a school does is force it to cut corners and focus on nothing but the numbers.

Obama does need to work on this; social issues aside it's why I voted for him. But it's a cooperative between the government and community. Levies for important things (e.g., new books and buses) are failing, and those for the less important (e.g., a new football stadium--not to discount athletics but, if the state is going to place so much emphasis on testing, academics needs to be the top priority) pass. The vast majority of parents who conference with their children's teachers and are involved in the schools are those whose children are already succeeding. That type of thing can't be solved with a signature and a bailout.
I'm currently majoring in English and getting my concentration in secondary education so I'll be a teacher in a few years as well. What do you think of Obama's suggestion to switch all schools to year-round institutions?

[xshady121]

My understanding of NCLB is that the democrats main beef with it up until it became the obvious whipping post for the failures of the Bush Administration is that it was severely underfunded. I'm not sure if I trust the democrats to do much more for education reform than just to give it the money it deserved from the get go. If this was the best they could do with a bipartisan bill (championed by Ted Kennedy) I find it hard to believe they'd be either able to create something more appropriate or even be able to get something more radical through congress now.

[Neo Cassady]

I'm currently majoring in English and getting my concentration in secondary education so I'll be a teacher in a few years as well. What do you think of Obama's suggestion to switch all schools to year-round institutions?

If it happens, I'll fight like hell for a substantial raise in compensation. Most teachers (and high school students) I know have summer jobs and I plan to get one as well; year-round schooling makes a secondary job all but impossible (no one hires for 3 weeks at a time every two months).

There are other issues I have with it that don't hit me personally...lack of A/C in some schools, for example.

[Baby for Pree]

If it happens, I'll fight like hell for a substantial raise in compensation. Most teachers I know have summer jobs and I plan to get one as well; year-round schooling makes a secondary job all but impossible (no one hires for 3 weeks at a time every two months).
That's basically the conclusion I came to as well.

[thatwasamoment]

I hope all high school students have the opportunity to opt out of their Junior and Senior year and choose a 2 year apprenticeship in the trade of their choice.

[Neo Cassady]

I hope all high school students have the opportunity to opt out of their Junior and Senior year and choose a 2 year apprenticeship in the trade of their choice.

That's what college is for. High school trade apprenticeship prepares kids for the workforce, but in doing so will deter some from going to college (not to mention the ones that still decide to go will be two years behind in every subject).

[saysmydoctor]

My understanding of NCLB is that the democrats main beef with it up until it became the obvious whipping post for the failures of the Bush Administration is that it was severely underfunded. I'm not sure if I trust the democrats to do much more for education reform than just to give it the money it deserved from the get go. If this was the best they could do with a bipartisan bill (championed by Ted Kennedy) I find it hard to believe they'd be either able to create something more appropriate or even be able to get something more radical through congress now.
NCLB was terrible legislation and it's not just cause it was underfunded. The goal posts were just ridiculously fucking high as well.

[Baby for Pree]

I hope all high school students have the opportunity to opt out of their Junior and Senior year and choose a 2 year apprenticeship in the trade of their choice.
I disagree. The education level required to work any job will always be rising. By studying calculus, trigonometry, and statistics, people will be better prepared to be lastingworkers, rather than workers who will be replaced in ten years when they aren't educated enough to use the new technology required in their field. Also, it's not a good idea to give a 16 year old the option to opt out of having to go to school.

NCLB was terrible legislation and it's not just cause it was underfunded. The goal posts were just ridiculously fucking high as well.
This. Also, it publicly humiliates schools that are not succeeding, possibly causing parents to avoid allowing their children to attend those schools (my parents woke up at 5 every morning to drive me to an out-of-district school rather than have me attend the at-risk school two minutes away from my house).

[xJesusFreakx]

I was planning on becoming a high school math teacher last year but changed my mind at the end of the spring semester because I realized it wasn't the right place for me. In that year I learned more than enough to know just how broken our education system is; I don't have any idea what the potential solutions would be, though.

[katyara]

The biggest problem I see is that because of NCLB, the schools that do poorly lose their funding. It makes no sense.

[thatwasamoment]

That's what college is for. High school trade apprenticeship prepares kids for the workforce, but in doing so will deter some from going to college (not to mention the ones that still decide to go will be two years behind in every subject).The kids that want to go to college can continue through Junior and Senior year. The kid that aspires to be a plumber might not want to go to college and would prefer working right away. College isn't for everyone.

I disagree. The education level required to work any job will always be rising. By studying calculus, trigonometry, and statistics, people will be better prepared to be lastingworkers, rather than workers who will be replaced in ten years when they aren't educated enough to use the new technology required in their field. Also, it's not a good idea to give a 16 year old the option to opt out of having to go to school.

.The two years in their apprenticeship will teach the trade students the math, science etc needed to succeed in their prospected field.

They're opting out of traditional high school, but will still be attending trade school. The learning will continue, just in a field of their choice.

[Love As Arson]

Distributing funds according to property taxes needs to be scrapped and we've yet to address the modern phenomenon of segregation.

[Baby for Pree]

The kids that want to go to college can continue through Junior and Senior year. The kid that aspires to be a plumber might not want to go to college and would prefer working right away. College isn't for everyone.

The two years in their apprenticeship will teach the trade students the math, science etc needed to succeed in their prospected field.

They're opting out of traditional high school, but will still be attending trade school. The learning will continue, just in a field of their choice.
My point is that plumbing won't always be as simple as getting on one's hands and knees and climbing under the sink with a wrench. Eventually, sinks will change and thusly, the skills needed to be a plumber will change. By opting out of the last two years of high school, students will be giving up the skills needed to survive in the ever changing workforce, and this applies to all professions. And what about entreuprenuers(sp?)? Suppose a plumber wants to start his own business. Without the basics of complex math one learns in their last two years of high school, he won't have the skills required to do so. Also, the purpose of education isn't just to create workers. It also serves to create well-rounded, cultured Americans. I agree; college isn't for everyone, but I just don't see any benefits to giving a 16 year-old the option to forgo high school and enter a trade school, especially since most high schools have tracks that will allow students to receive basic training in a field of their choice while simultaneously continuing their basic high school graduation requirements in math, english, and science.

Distributing funds according to property taxes needs to be scrapped and we've yet to address the modern phenomenon of segregation.
Yup. Here in Charlotte, we used to have busing until a group of mostly upper and middle class caucasians sued the district to end it. Now, all the poor minority students go to school together while all the well-off caucasian students go to school together. From the window in my dormroom, I can see Myer's Park Elementary, one of the wealthier schools. Only ten minutes down the road is a school called Billingsville where I did my clincals last year. It is a very poverty stricken school made up of about 90% minority students and nearly all of them are on free/reduced lunch. I don't see why anyone would ignore the undeniable benefits busing would have on the cultures and funding of these two schools.

[saysmydoctor]

Distributing funds according to property taxes needs to be scrapped and we've yet to address the modern phenomenon of segregation.
All of this.

[Skadrist]

Yup. Here in Charlotte, we used to have busing until a group of mostly upper and middle class caucasians sued the district to end it. Now, all the poor minority students go to school together while all the well-off caucasian students go to school together. From the window in my dormroom, I can see Myer's Park Elementary, one of the wealthier schools. Only ten minutes down the road is a school called Billingsville where I did my clincals last year. It is a very poverty stricken school made up of about 90% minority students and nearly all of them are on free/reduced lunch. I don't see why anyone would ignore the undeniable benefits busing would have on the cultures and funding of these two schools.

The Dallas school district is 90% black and Hispanic; there is only one school high school with a substantial amount of white kids and that is Booker T. Washington. This school also happens to be an art magnet school so the upscale white folks completely. Despite this the private high schools in Dallas are insanely well regarded, hell I drove past one of them on Saturday and it had observatory. Two of the three high schools in my area have been deemed under performing, one had it's 11th and 12th graders shipped off to other schools while another is on the brink of a similar fate.

[saysmydoctor]

Charter schools are disgusting.

[saysmydoctor]

The idea of consolidating NYS' numerous school districts appears to be catching hold.

Thank god.

[loveisdead]

The idea of consolidating NYS' numerous school districts appears to be catching hold.

Thank god.
Explain further please.

[saysmydoctor]

Well, 62 counties in New York State but there are this many school districts (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_school_districts_in_New_Yor k). This is what I'm talking about when I always say that it's administrative costs that make education so damn costly in this country.

A lot of people are advocating reform. 62 counties, 62 school districts. (Plus 5 for the Big Five cities)

[saysmydoctor]

http://www.ed.gov/news/pressreleases/2009/07/07242009.html

So if a state loses, the schools in that state don't reap these funds, and the students in that state lose.

THIS IS SUCH A GREAT PROGRAM.

[saysmydoctor]

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/16/education/16teach.html?_r=2&ref=education
http://www.buffalonews.com/cityregion/story/864373.html

Smart Education policy at work. I really like our state commissioner.

[saysmydoctor]

http://www.eduwonk.com/2009/11/most-important-nclb-lawsuit-you-never-heard-of.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Eduwonk+%28Edu wonk.com%29
The most important NCLB lawsuit you never heard of.

[x togepi x]

i would like to see an emphasis on less authoritarianism in school and a critique of biopower. I doubt this will ever happen.

[saysmydoctor]

i would like to see an emphasis on less authoritarianism in school and a critique of biopower. I doubt this will ever happen.
By authoritarianism, do you mean in the process of education needs to be less authoritarian?

[x togepi x]

By authoritarianism, do you mean in the process of education needs to be less authoritarian?

yes. there are whole groups of students that we write off as "bad students" who might be "good students" if they didn't feel the whole system was stacked against them. i mean, are you really learning as much as you can when you think of the institution as a prison?

[saysmydoctor]

yes. there are whole groups of students that we write off as "bad students" who might be "good students" if they didn't feel the whole system was stacked against them. i mean, are you really learning as much as you can when you think of the institution as a prison?
Exactly. There are numerous kinds of students who require a different learning environment, a different instructing style, etc. I also agree that education should be a mutual cooperation between student and educator.

[cantnokdahustle]

Charter schools are disgusting.

Working in one got me into a damned good grad program. Charter Schools are ridiculous cash grabs for predatory business opportunists.

Exactly. There are numerous kinds of students who require a different learning environment, a different instructing style, etc. I also agree that education should be a mutual cooperation between student and educator.

Paulo Freire is your friend. I Recommend the Pedagogy of Freedom.

[saysmydoctor]

Working in one got me into a damned good grad program. Charter Schools are ridiculous cash grabs for predatory business opportunists.



Paulo Freire is your friend. I Recommend the Pedagogy of Freedom.
Amen.

I'll check him out for sure.

[cantnokdahustle]

I'm not a huge fan of Freire, his Catholicism drives a great deal of his philosophy, but his ideas on student/teacher relationships are certainly worth a look. My interests are more in line with Dewey's.

[open mind]

yes. there are whole groups of students that we write off as "bad students" who might be "good students" if they didn't feel the whole system was stacked against them. i mean, are you really learning as much as you can when you think of the institution as a prison?

i was one of those "bad students" and ended up dropping out when i was 15.

the near complete loss of the stay at home parent has resulted in less cooperation and communication between students, parents, and teachers. i think this has affected the quality of education in more ways then we realize. i haven't the foggiest idea how it can be corrected but it strikes me as one of the main reasons our education system is increasingly ineffective.

teachers need to be given more training when it comes to cultural differences because when miscommunication occurs it's always the student who pays for it.

[rawesome]

i was one of those "bad students" and ended up dropping out when i was 15.

the near complete loss of the stay at home parent has resulted in less cooperation and communication between students, parents, and teachers. i think this has affected the quality of education in more ways then we realize. i haven't the foggiest idea how it can be corrected but it strikes me as one of the main reasons our education system is increasingly ineffective.

teachers need to be given more training when it comes to cultural differences because when miscommunication occurs it's always the student who pays for it.
I agree with this a lot. I am in school training to be a teacher in just a year and a half and I don't feel like I've gotten any instruction on classroom management or handling students. I've tried to bring this up but they seem to ignore the issue and just pump us full of the same, repeated pedagogy that we've been studying since my first semester.

I'm not sure how other schools go about it, though.

[saysmydoctor]

http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dailypolitics/2009/11/in-obamas-name-bloomberg-takes.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+nydnrss%2Fblog s%2Fdailypolitics+%28Blogs%2FThe+Da ily+Politics%29
If Race to the Top wasn't just adding fuel to the fire, Bloomberg would be onto something.

[saysmydoctor]

http://cspan.org/Watch/Media/2009/11/25/HP/A/26465/Mayor+Bloomberg+and+Sec+Duncan+Disc uss+Education+Reform.aspx
Video of Bloomberg/Duncan at CAP

[Mitch]

That "Race to the Top" initiative doesn't sound very good, although I'm extremely uneducated on this topic.

[saysmydoctor]

It's incentivizing states to make changes in order to win money from the states. Basically.

[saysmydoctor]

http://www.schoolsmatter.info/2009/12/casino-capitalist-hedge-funders-move.html
Hmmm

[saysmydoctor]

http://www.thealbanyproject.com/diary/7663/more-nys-budget-cuts

Comments bring up the very debate I was seeking, but a countering perspective supporting SUNY cuts and rebuttal from a reader.

[saysmydoctor]

http://www.ed.gov/programs/racetothetop/intent-to-apply.html
ED released the first 36 states who intend to apply for RttT

[saysmydoctor]

http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2009/10/14/07wallace-mayoral.h29.html
A discussion on mayoral control of schools. I personally love the idea because it saves money and usually leads to better grades, etc, etc.

Mayoral control, along with fixing how schools are funding (like Dom said, scrapping the property tax based model), is the key to fixing urban schools.

[saysmydoctor]

Obama making talked about education last night and with RttT and ESEA renewal coming up, 2010 is going to be big for education

Critics of the Administration's policies: http://www.examiner.com/x-356-SF-Education-Examiner~y2010m1d24-US-official-admits-administration-policies-are--harming-the-education-of-students?cid=exrss-SF-Education-Examiner

[Machu505]

Distance learning is literally the shittiest experience I've ever had at school. If you don't know what it is, the teacher is at a different school in the county but you see her on a TV.

You don't learn this way.

[GeeBee]

Distance learning is literally the shittiest experience I've ever had at school. If you don't know what it is, the teacher is at a different school in the county but you see her on a TV.

You don't learn this way.

Unfortunately, internet/distance learning seem to be the wave of the future.

[saysmydoctor]

So glad someone broke the saysmydoctor spam.

[Machu505]

Utah state senator suggests cutting the twelfth grade (http://thinkprogress.org/2010/02/16/conservatives-eliminating-12th-grade/) to bring down the budget deficit.

[caveBEAR]

Utah state senator suggests cutting the twelfth grade (http://thinkprogress.org/2010/02/16/conservatives-eliminating-12th-grade/) to bring down the budget deficit.

Meh, 12th grade was kind of a joke at my high school.

[Mitch]

Utah state senator suggests cutting the twelfth grade (http://thinkprogress.org/2010/02/16/conservatives-eliminating-12th-grade/) to bring down the budget deficit.

Great idea!

:hitself:

Many people are dumb enough right out of high school as is.

[wrppdarndyrfngr]

especially in Utah. But hey they can just go on their Vision Quests earlier now.

/ gross generalizations.

[Mitch]

Distance learning is literally the shittiest experience I've ever had at school. If you don't know what it is, the teacher is at a different school in the county but you see her on a TV.

You don't learn this way.

What? That sounds absolutely awful. How common is this?

[Machu505]

What? That sounds absolutely awful. How common is this?

I know we use it for some French classes and all German classes. I'm not sure how common it is state or nationwide, though.

[FueledByFrodo]

Distance learning is literally the shittiest experience I've ever had at school. If you don't know what it is, the teacher is at a different school in the county but you see her on a TV.

You don't learn this way.

If my school did this, I'd change schools. That's totally ridiculous.

Utah state senator suggests cutting the twelfth grade (http://thinkprogress.org/2010/02/16/conservatives-eliminating-12th-grade/) to bring down the budget deficit.

Makes sense. You know, since at least in my school most students barely learned anything in the four years they were there. :rolleyes:

[saysmydoctor]

http://www.projo.com/education/content/central_falls_teachers.1_02-13-10_A8HEI7Q_v61.3a65218.html
the fuck.

[wrppdarndyrfngr]

dang

[vodyanoj]

I hope all high school students have the opportunity to opt out of their Junior and Senior year and choose a 2 year apprenticeship in the trade of their choice.

I don't know about that. High school graduates in the USA are already woefully undereducated compared to Europe and letting them get away with less education is not the solution. (A high school diploma from an average European school is roughly equivalent to an Associate's degree in USA).

[Bruised26]

I don't know about that. High school graduates in the USA are already woefully undereducated compared to Europe and letting them get away with less education is not the solution. (A high school diploma from an average European school is roughly equivalent to an Associate's degree in USA).

Europe's education is different. In some of the countries (or maybe all), students have 2 tracks they get to choose from for secondary school. One track is math/science oriented, the other is humanities oriented. I think thats a great idea and I hands down think america should do that. Maybe not for 9th and 10th grade but 11th and 12th grade would be smart because most students know what they want career wise at that age, and having them take classes that arent beneficial to a certain degree is a waste of time, money, and resources.

[saysmydoctor]

Europe's education is different. In some of the countries (or maybe all), students have 2 tracks they get to choose from for secondary school. One track is math/science oriented, the other is humanities oriented. I think thats a great idea and I hands down think america should do that. Maybe not for 9th and 10th grade but 11th and 12th grade would be smart because most students know what they want career wise at that age, and having them take classes that arent beneficial to a certain degree is a waste of time, money, and resources.
Europe's education is different in more ways than this--their system is friendlier to this kind of model.

[vodyanoj]

Europe's education is different. In some of the countries (or maybe all), students have 2 tracks they get to choose from for secondary school. One track is math/science oriented, the other is humanities oriented. I think thats a great idea and I hands down think america should do that. Maybe not for 9th and 10th grade but 11th and 12th grade would be smart because most students know what they want career wise at that age, and having them take classes that arent beneficial to a certain degree is a waste of time, money, and resources.

It doesn't matter after all: since even if you are humanities-oriented, you still get more math and science in European high schools than you do here. (I know: I am a product of one :))

EDIT: Introductory classes in ALL major scientific disciplines, at least 3 yeas of physics and 2 of chemistry; world history and basic musical and art theory, mathematics at least to general calculus level, are all required.

[vodyanoj]

Europe's education is different in more ways than this--their system is friendlier to this kind of model.

It is also much more "authoritarian".

[saysmydoctor]

It is also much more "authoritarian".
I wouldn't really say any more so or less so than the US, unless you mean like more centralized.

[vodyanoj]

I wouldn't really say any more so or less so than the US, unless you mean like more centralized.

You do not get much choice about subject matter, unlike in US high schools, where there is considerable latitude in choosing your classes. General requirements of US high schools (obviously not all: I am only familiar with California and Oregon standards) are pretty pathetic. Add to that the idiocy of creationists who are trying to dilute an already weak science curriculum even further, and you have a recipe for disaster.

[Bruised26]

You do not get much choice about subject matter, unlike in US high schools, where there is considerable latitude in choosing your classes. General requirements of US high schools (obviously not all: I am only familiar with California and Oregon standards) are pretty pathetic. Add to that the idiocy of creationists who are trying to dilute an already weak science curriculum even further, and you have a recipe for disaster.

I think the US requirements are extraneous. In Georgia (and Florida, I think) requirements are 4 maths, 4 sciences, 3 years foreign language, 4 histories, 4 lits, and then a around 8+ electives (and thats not all the credits required).
And I have no problem with creation or evolution tought in schools, but in most schools (especially the South), whenever a teacher begins to teach evolution, many students begin to laugh or protest because they are creationists. Even my biology teacher said that the evolution theory is bullshit but he had to teach it anyway. THIS is why I go to a charter school- more freedom to do what you want to do, and no excessive homework.
and about the European system we were discussing, the 2 track method used to be what they followed (according to my spanish teacher who is a product of Spain's education system), but maybe they dont use it anymore.

[saysmydoctor]

You do not get much choice about subject matter, unlike in US high schools, where there is considerable latitude in choosing your classes. General requirements of US high schools (obviously not all: I am only familiar with California and Oregon standards) are pretty pathetic. Add to that the idiocy of creationists who are trying to dilute an already weak science curriculum even further, and you have a recipe for disaster.
What are you talking about? Students in Europe get a diverse set of languages to learn--and at a far younger age. On top of living in a very international atmosphere, the schools introduce new cultures in the classrooms as well--something not done in the US. There is far more diversity overseas--their students are far more well-rounded.

You are saying the two systems are similar. That's inaccurate in so many ways.

[macabre]

http://www.thealbanyproject.com/diary/7663/more-nys-budget-cuts

Comments bring up the very debate I was seeking, but a countering perspective supporting SUNY cuts and rebuttal from a reader.

Are the budget cuts to SUNY schools going to have a huge impact on graduate education?

[saysmydoctor]

Are the budget cuts to SUNY schools going to have a huge impact on graduate education?
It really depends on which SUNY schools you are talking about. Out of the 64, seven are pretty much immune:
http://polhudson.lohudblogs.com/2010/02/22/report-suny-tuition-hikes-for-non-residents-could-backfire/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+lohudblogs%2Fp olhudson+%28Politics+on+the+Hudson% 29

[macabre]

It really depends on which SUNY schools you are talking about. Out of the 64, seven are pretty much immune:
http://polhudson.lohudblogs.com/2010/02/22/report-suny-tuition-hikes-for-non-residents-could-backfire/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+lohudblogs%2Fp olhudson+%28Politics+on+the+Hudson% 29

Stony Brook?

[saysmydoctor]

Stony Brook?
Stony Brook will be fine. It's one of the university centers, SUNY knows where its bread is buttered.

[macabre]

Stony Brook will be fine. It's one of the university centers, SUNY knows where its bread is buttered.

Yeah, I didn't really want to ask the faculty directly about the budget situation because I know for some people it's a touchy subject.

[saysmydoctor]

Yeah, I didn't really want to ask the faculty directly about the budget situation because I know for some people it's a touchy subject.
SUNY takes care of their SUNY university centers, probably what costs the smaller schools so much. I personally think the SUNY system is overly large. Even for a state this size.

[xshady121]

So what do you guys think of this?

http://wbztv.com/local/central.falls.high.2.1516541.html

[saysmydoctor]

So what do you guys think of this?

http://wbztv.com/local/central.falls.high.2.1516541.html
Think it shows the problems with both sides.

Personally think the Superintendent was justified. Then again, it's not like the institution provides a framework for a teacher to excel in either.

Also: http://www.schoolsmatter.info/2010/02/central-falls-ri-turnaround-fire-all.html

[boxingwithstars]

So what do you guys think of this?

http://wbztv.com/local/central.falls.high.2.1516541.html

sounds like they're putting a band-aid over a huge wound if you ask me. not to mention, none of those options they were given sound like ways to fix the problem. it would make more sense to fire the administration than it would to fire every single teacher.

[vodyanoj]

What are you talking about? Students in Europe get a diverse set of languages to learn--and at a far younger age. On top of living in a very international atmosphere, the schools introduce new cultures in the classrooms as well--something not done in the US. There is far more diversity overseas--their students are far more well-rounded.

You are saying the two systems are similar. That's inaccurate in so many ways.

What does language have to do with it? I am talking about a set of required subjects that is so far ahead of anything US offers--at least in schools I am familiar with--and which is not up to the student to decide. You don't get to pick which "science" you have to take for a year in high school: you sort of have to do them all.

I think you have been reading someone else; since I am a product of European education (until 16), I feel like I have some knowledge of the subject...

EDIT: Granted, speaking of "European" education is somewhat of a red herring. There are huge differences between British and German models, and I am not sure what goes on in the South, if anything...:)

[vodyanoj]

I think the US requirements are extraneous. In Georgia (and Florida, I think) requirements are 4 maths, 4 sciences, 3 years foreign language, 4 histories, 4 lits, and then a around 8+ electives (and thats not all the credits required).
And I have no problem with creation or evolution tought in schools, but in most schools (especially the South), whenever a teacher begins to teach evolution, many students begin to laugh or protest because they are creationists. Even my biology teacher said that the evolution theory is bullshit but he had to teach it anyway. THIS is why I go to a charter school- more freedom to do what you want to do, and no excessive homework.
and about the European system we were discussing, the 2 track method used to be what they followed (according to my spanish teacher who is a product of Spain's education system), but maybe they dont use it anymore.

By "4", do you mean 4 semesters? Because that would still be rather pathetic.

And of course creationism can be taught in school: in a theology class. It certainly does not belong in a biology class, and if your biology teacher thought that evolution theory was "bullshit", he was himself entirely full of shit and should not hold a teaching position since he is obviously not qualified.

EDIT: I used to think of homework as "excessive" as well, until I got into a real university and realized how well it served me, and how unprepared I was anyway.

[saysmydoctor]

http://www.schoolsmatter.info/2010/02/were-1.html

Success in school and your socioeconomic status are directly related.

[open mind]

i object to the jack of all trade and master of none philosophy of education in the u.s.........if students were given the the option and resources to devote themselves to a particular trade/occupation early in their education they'd probably be more invested in their classes since they'd be learning about subjects they believe are pertinent to their lives.......and would actually learn them instead of cramming and passing a test just to forget everything they just "learned".

[saysmydoctor]

i object to the jack of all trade and master of none philosophy of education in the u.s.........if students were given the the option and resources to devote themselves to a particular trade/occupation they'd probably be more invested in their education.
Well-roundedness is not something to discourage. I understand your dislike of the extremes, but in general--having a varied prior knowledge resource is ultimately more beneficial to a person intellectually.

[open mind]

Well-roundedness is not something to discourage. I understand your dislike of the extremes, but in general--having a varied prior knowledge resource is ultimately more beneficial to a person intellectually.

society does not need to be entirely intellectual......happiness and efficiency are much more important drivers in productivity then deep thought on society (unless those thoughts change the world for the better....but you might as well spend all your energy becoming the nba's number #1 draft pick while having a height of 5'5 instead of hoping for that)........i know that i as an unhappy intellectual would love to be happy and have a sense of real purpose.

i'm a habitual abuser of parenthesis (and punctuation in general).......please excuse this shortcoming on the grounds that i never progressed passed the 9th grade (teachers actively hated me and i returned the favor).

as long as the government does not actively discourage free thought i see no reason to force people to "learn" about things that have nothing to do with anything they'll ever choose to deal with in their professional lives .......well i guess cultural sensitivity would be my only caveat to that as breakdowns between cultures hurt everyone.

[saysmydoctor]

society does not need to be entirely intellectual......happiness and efficiency are much more important drivers in productivity then deep thought on society (unless those thoughts change the world for the better....but you might as well spend all your energy becoming the nba's number #1 draft pick while having a height of 5'5 instead of hoping for that)........i know that i as an unhappy intellectual would love to be happy and have a sense of real purpose.

i'm a habitual abuser of parenthesis (and punctuation in general).......please excuse this shortcoming on the grounds that i never progressed passed the 9th grade (teachers actively hated me and i returned the favor).

as long as the government does not actively discourage free thought i see no reason to force people to "learn" about things that have nothing to do with anything they'll ever choose to deal with in their professional lives .......well i guess cultural sensitivity would be my only caveat to that as breakdowns between cultures hurt everyone.
You're associating with intellectualness with your happiness as if they are correlated.

I'm saying from a genetic, human development standpoint, well-roundedness is beneficial. It's not impossible to be well-rounded and specialized. People specialize all the time.

If anything, we need to provide people with a better opportunity to gain access to a mine of knowledge and information. The problems with schools is that we are teaching the wrong way, not that we are teaching.

[saysmydoctor]

http://www.schoolsmatter.info/2010/02/virginias-mcdonnell-ready-to-use-state.html
Virginians don't want charter schools, McDonnell doesn't register this.

[open mind]

You're associating with intellectualness with your happiness as if they are correlated.

I'm saying from a genetic, human development standpoint, well-roundedness is beneficial. It's not impossible to be well-rounded and specialized. People specialize all the time.

If anything, we need to provide people with a better opportunity to gain access to a mine of knowledge and information. The problems with schools is that we are teaching the wrong way, not that we are teaching.

they aren't?

genetic? yeah it's not impossible to be well rounded but the educational systems insistence that you must be well rounded turns millions of kids off and away.

lack of access of knowledge is not the problem in todays society, the internet is everywhere and you can find anything you want on it. we not only teach the wrong way we also teach a lot of crap that kids immediately throw out of their minds once they pass a test.

[saysmydoctor]

they aren't?

genetic? yeah it's not impossible to be well rounded but the educational systems insistence that you must be well rounded turns millions of kids off and away.

lack of access of knowledge is not the problem in todays society, the internet is everywhere and you can find anything you want on it. we not only teach the wrong way we also teach a lot of crap that kids immediately throw out of their minds once they pass a test.
Not the way you are trying to imply it.

It's not like I don't acknowledge that the educational system isn't authoritarian and is a roadblock to learning. We agree on everything but your rejection of well-roundedness is fundamentally wrong. It's all a matter of stimulation. I acknowledge that we teach our kids wrong.

[open mind]

Not the way you are trying to imply it.

It's not like I don't acknowledge that the educational system isn't authoritarian and is a roadblock to learning. We agree on everything but your rejection of well-roundedness is fundamentally wrong. It's all a matter of stimulation. I acknowledge that we teach our kids wrong.

why is my objection to the standard curriculum "fundamentally wrong"?

[saysmydoctor]

why is my objection to the standard curriculum "fundamentally wrong"?
I'm saying rejection of well-roundedness being encouraged is fundamentally wrong. I agree with you that institutionally speaking, we approach all wrong.

But from a developmental standpoint, a person presented with diversity is only helping themselves. So to say we shouldn't encourage that--most educational psychologists would disagree with you and they have the research to back it up.

[vodyanoj]

I'm saying rejection of well-roundedness being encouraged is fundamentally wrong. I agree with you that institutionally speaking, we approach all wrong.

But from a developmental standpoint, a person presented with diversity is only helping themselves. So to say we shouldn't encourage that--most educational psychologists would disagree with you and they have the research to back it up.


Ha ha, I agree, except for the fact that I (of course) do not consider the US educational system to be "well" rounded. "Poorly" rounded, perhaps, but as I have said before, without a curriculum that includes all introductory physical and life sciences and a decent course in world history and philosophy, it does not even begin to approach a sphere of any sort.

[saysmydoctor]

Ha ha, I agree, except for the fact that I (of course) do not consider the US educational system to be "well" rounded. "Poorly" rounded, perhaps, but as I have said before, without a curriculum that includes all introductory physical and life sciences and a decent course in world history and philosophy, it does not even begin to approach a sphere of any sort.
Which is why I said most of Europe provides a greater variety. A diversity of languages to study, numerous sciences, etc. Not to mention, they assess their kids better (not much, but better). At least that's what I've gathered from what I've read.

I'd say globally, most if not all educational systems are still considerably authoritarian. Slight differences mean a lot though. Some states encourage schools to develop curriculum that include cooperative learning strategies, strategies that address the numerous ways in which we process knowledge, and a curriculum that stimulates pupils positively.

[vodyanoj]

Which is why I said most of Europe provides a greater variety. A diversity of languages to study, numerous sciences, etc. Not to mention, they assess their kids better (not much, but better). At least that's what I've gathered from what I've read.

I'd say globally, most if not all educational systems are still considerably authoritarian. Slight differences mean a lot though. Some states encourage schools to develop curriculum that include cooperative learning strategies, strategies that address the numerous ways in which we process knowledge, and a curriculum that stimulates pupils positively.

The thing is--and the sense in which I was using the word "authoritarian"--that in most European educational systems a student has little choice about what subjects she is going to study. We grumble a lot about "having" to do all these "pointless" subjects; but I must say that I was glad to have had that level of education once I moved to USA. It was easy to feel superior to most people in my age group...:)

[saysmydoctor]

The thing is--and the sense in which I was using the word "authoritarian"--that in most European educational systems a student has little choice about what subjects she is going to study. We grumble a lot about "having" to do all these "pointless" subjects; but I must say that I was glad to have had that level of education once I moved to USA. It was easy to feel superior to most people in my age group...:)
Gen Ed guidelines in the US are the same. You just saw a guy earlier in the thread outline the lengths of a topic he had to study in high school just for him to get a high school diploma. I had to take four years of Spanish and had no interest in learning Spanish and not to mention, the way they taught the class is hugely ineffective because the US doesn't push bilingualism until we are in high school. Yet, research time and time again has shown that it's best to teach a second language to a child at a younger age. He gains more out of it and it's easier.

And a language has reciprocal value. Because we generally don't just teach English and how to speak but the historical progression of the language.

I know I always return to language when it comes to Europe--I'm just infinitely jealous that language diversity seems more encouraged there. Japan is another good example of this. Creating a multicultural environment is one of the most effective classroom techniques and Europe does that far more effectively than the US does, in my opinion.

[vodyanoj]

Gen Ed guidelines in the US are the same. You just saw a guy earlier in the thread outline the lengths of a topic he had to study in high school just for him to get a high school diploma. I had to take four years of Spanish and had no interest in learning Spanish and not to mention, the way they taught the class is hugely ineffective because the US doesn't push bilingualism until we are in high school. Yet, research time and time again has shown that it's best to teach a second language to a child at a younger age. He gains more out of it and it's easier.

And a language has reciprocal value. Because we generally don't just teach English and how to speak but the historical progression of the language.

I know I always return to language when it comes to Europe--I'm just infinitely jealous that language diversity seems more encouraged there. Japan is another good example of this. Creating a multicultural environment is one of the most effective classroom techniques and Europe does that far more effectively than the US does, in my opinion.

THEY ARE NOT THE SAME. By the time I was 16 years old and moving to US, I'd had 2 years of physics, 3 of chemistry, 2 of biology, 1 of botany, 1 of zoology, several years of world history, English from 2nd grade and geometry to curved spaces and algebra and basic calculus. Astronomy was supposed to kick in the next year. And my school was nothing special besides having an emphasis on English language. When I came over to the USA and was filling out the paperwork for my high-school level, there was one box for the number of semesters of science one had had on the form. Granted, that was in California. In any case, we didn't have any electives at all: each subject was required.

I am in complete agreement about language diversity, however: the more languages, the better!

[saysmydoctor]

http://www.schoolsmatter.info/2010/03/more-from-central-falls.html

More on that RI district that made headlines.

[caveBEAR]

http://www.schoolsmatter.info/2010/03/more-from-central-falls.html

More on that RI district that made headlines.

They fired the entire staff because of low standardized testing scores?

[saysmydoctor]

Consistently low.

[open mind]

I'm saying rejection of well-roundedness being encouraged is fundamentally wrong. I agree with you that institutionally speaking, we approach all wrong.

But from a developmental standpoint, a person presented with diversity is only helping themselves. So to say we shouldn't encourage that--most educational psychologists would disagree with you and they have the research to back it up.

encouraging well roundedness is entirely different then enforcing it with an iron hand. i do not reject well roundedness i merely assert that it isn't a requirement in the work force....and greater efficiency and gains in each particular field might well result in paradise (jk).

lately i've been thinking that teens don't appreciate what they're being handed (i know i did nothing but bitch and moan about the"man" and my parents back then)....and what better way is there to wake them up to the disadvantages of being a moron then having middle school students work menial jobs for a couple of years instead of being coddled because they're in an adolescent stage? it'd probably drastically effect the drop out rate if nothing else.

[open mind]

Consistently low.

standardized tests are bullshit and they have a racist slant to them.

[saysmydoctor]

encouraging well roundedness is entirely different then enforcing it with an iron hand. i do not reject well roundedness i merely assert that it isn't a requirement in the work force....and greater efficiency and gains in each particular field might well result in paradise (jk).

lately i've been thinking that teens don't appreciate what they're being handed (i know i did nothing but bitch and moan about the"man" and my parents back then)....and what better way is there to wake them up to the disadvantages of being a moron then having middle school students work menial jobs for a couple of years instead of being coddled because they're in an adolescent stage? it'd probably drastically effect the drop out rate if nothing else.
See, your problem the authoritarian nature of the institution. The intents are innocent. It's just the manifestation. We agree a lot, actually.

[open mind]

See, your problem the authoritarian nature of the institution. The intents are innocent. It's just the manifestation. We agree a lot, actually.

my problem is not only with the authoritarian nature of education it's also with it's insistence in "learning" shit that students hold in their heads just as long as they need to to pass a test instead of actually learning shit......if education dealt with things that students felt the need to know (beyond passing a bastardized standard test) maybe they'd retain it.
what would fix this problem? i say specialization (in areas that effectively further the pursuit of a students dreams) would do the trick.

[open mind]

I'm saying rejection of well-roundedness being encouraged is fundamentally wrong. I agree with you that institutionally speaking, we approach all wrong.

But from a developmental standpoint, a person presented with diversity is only helping themselves. So to say we shouldn't encourage that--most educational psychologists would disagree with you and they have the research to back it up.

our educational system does not present diversity......it presents slightly different ways of backing western thought....the crushing ways in which white teachers/government/religious leaders have shit on native thought and viewpoints are undeniable examples of that.

[saysmydoctor]

my problem is not only with the authoritarian nature of education it's also with it's insistence in "learning" shit that students hold in their heads just as long as they need to to pass a test instead of actually learning shit......if education dealt with things that students felt the need to know (beyond passing a bastardized standard test) maybe they'd retain it.
what would fix this problem? i say specialization (in areas that effectively further the pursuit of a students dreams) would do the trick.
Well teachers were actually teaching, students wouldn't be learning like that. You are going across the spectrums of educational psychology and educational administration. There is countless problems. They're all connected. It's going to take a lot of work.

Insisting learning isn't bad--it's good for your mental health and self-efficacy. Scientific fact.

[open mind]

Well teachers were actually teaching, students wouldn't be learning like that. You are going across the spectrums of educational psychology and educational administration. There is countless problems. They're all connected. It's going to take a lot of work.

Insisting learning isn't bad--it's good for your mental health and self-efficacy. Scientific fact.

i don't have any idea what you're talking about.....so i'll just assume that we're both out of our minds on one substance or another.

[boxingwithstars]

the Race To The Top finalists (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/04/race-to-the-top-finalists_n_486096.html) have been chosen for the first round.

Selected from a pool of 41 applicants are: Colorado, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina and Tennessee. The winners will be chosen in April, and a second round of applications accepted in June.

[Machu505]

Fuck that. We need it more.

[boxingwithstars]

see, this is the problem i have with the whole RTTT thing, because it seems like the states that need it the most don't have the resources right now to even compete. not to mention the goals they are required to meet don't really deviate much from the goals in NCLB, which bothers me. but at the same time i think it's great that they're providing an incentive like this for states to focus on education.

[saysmydoctor]

New York winning is hilarious.

[vodyanoj]

our educational system does not present diversity......it presents slightly different ways of backing western thought....the crushing ways in which white teachers/government/religious leaders have shit on native thought and viewpoints are undeniable examples of that.

Are you telling me physics is one of those "crushing ways"? I can see this charge being levelled against the way humanities are taught in primary schools here (or, pretty much anywhere) but certainly not science. I remember being quite disgusted by the pro-US slant of my high school history classes (they were teaching things that I knew to be factually incorrect). But that is common to most countries: it isn't like any of educational systems is entirely free of bias.

[The Indigo]

I've been thinking a little lately about how successful a tax cut for parents with children who have perfect attendance would be. A few countries have tried it (mostly to curb child labor) and I was wondering if it'd work here in America. Thoughts?

[caveBEAR]

I've been thinking a little lately about how successful a tax cut for parents with children who have perfect attendance would be. A few countries have tried it (mostly to curb child labor) and I was wondering if it'd work here in America. Thoughts?

No one should miss out on a tax cut because of a possible flu.

[The Indigo]

No one should miss out on a tax cut because of a possible flu.
Agreed. I think there should be exceptions for that kind of thing, but I think it'd be useful overall to look into implementing that kind of policy.

[caveBEAR]

Agreed. I think there should be exceptions for that kind of thing, but I think it'd be useful overall to look into implementing that kind of policy.

I've been thinking a little lately about how successful a tax cut for parents with children who have perfect attendance would be. A few countries have tried it (mostly to curb child labor) and I was wondering if it'd work here in America. Thoughts?


Hmmmm...

You should really be more clear about what you say then.

[The Indigo]

Hmmmm...
:shrug: Perfect attendance isn't affected by illness with a doctor's note, or at least that's how it was when I went to school.

[caveBEAR]

:shrug: Perfect attendance isn't affected by illness with a doctor's note, or at least that's how it was when I went to school.

It was when I went to school. You had an excused absence, but you didn't get the little certificate at the end of the school year.

[saysmydoctor]

It's an idea, but it's a typical bandaid apparoach.

[myplanforescape]

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/03/11/national/main6289500.shtml

Kansas City to close 29 of 61 schools. The article says a lot of the schools have too few students, but it doesn't really make it clear if this would cause overcrowding issues or not.

[Machu505]

Texas rewrites (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/12/texas-education-board-app_n_497440.html) history.

[saysmydoctor]

http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/education-the-wrong-track-0


Ten years ago, I would have written the same things that you wrote (http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/educations-tea-partier) for this symposium. I too would have been hopeful that the business model of schooling would inject new dynamism into American education. I too would have been impressed by the lingo and data-talk of the corporate suits. I too would have imagined that deregulation was the answer to our problems and that the market would produce competition and improvement. The point of my book (http://www.amazon.com/Death-Great-American-School-System/dp/0465014917/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1263656150&sr=8-1) is to explain that these strategies don’t work and to supply the evidence for my conclusions.


Ben, I am no critic of the market economy. I love having choices about where I shop. But, as I point out in the book, going to school is not the same as shopping. Most parents want a stable school that is within a reasonable distance of their home, so that they can drop off their child in the morning and pick her up at the end of day or get to school quickly if she gets sick in the middle of the day. Schools operate differently from, say, shoe stores, which open and close in response to consumer demand. Schools are essential community institutions, like firehouses. They are cooperative enterprises, where the adults are expected to work closely with one another towards common goals. Teachers should not compete with each other for extra dollars (Edward Deming says that this kind of competition doesn't even work in business, that it demoralizes the workplace). Teachers should share what they know, not hoard their trade secrets for their private benefit.


Ben, you ignore the evidence that charter schools, on average, do not outperform regular public schools. Charter students have been tested by the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) in 2003, 2005, 2007, and 2009, and they have never done better than regular public schools. Charters have the supposed advantage of deregulation, non-union teachers, longer hours, longer years--and, in some cases, the extra money contributed by generous philanthropists, yet they have not outscored regular public school students on NAEP, which is the gold standard of educational testing. One sector or the other may get a blip one year, but there has been no sustained advantage for students in charters, be they black, Hispanic, low-income, or residents of urban districts, compared to their peers in regular public schools.


Nor has test-based accountability produced genuine improvement in education. The era of NCLB has been marked by lowered state standards, cheating, and widespread gaming of the system. While the states claim big leaps forward, NAEP shows very little improvement. In math, the gains were larger before NCLB than after it was implemented. On eighth grade reading, there have been no gains at all since 1998, even though these are the students who grew up with NCLB.


When I was asked, at the meeting where you heard me speak, about educational progress in Massachusetts, I said that it is a stellar example of what can happen when a state adopts genuine curricular standards and provides the professional development for teachers to learn to teach the improved content knowledge in the standards. Massachusetts also introduced entry exams for teachers, which weeded out poorly prepared candidates. I lauded Massachusetts highly, both in my book and at the meeting, so it is surprising that you now charge me with failing to recognize its progress. Massachusetts, by the way, has relatively few charter schools; it has earned its high marks the old-fashioned way, by improving its curriculum, testing incoming teachers, and sponsoring assessments far superior to those in most other states. I do not object to graduation examinations. What I object to is using the results of tests to punish teachers and close schools.
You describe the reform "consensus," but the consensus seems to exist mainly inside Beltway think tanks, corporate suites, foundation offices, editorial boards, and at the highest levels of government. Those who are not part of the consensus are ordinary classroom teachers, the very people who are supposed to implement the “reforms.”


I am not happy with the state of American education. I do not long for the mythical good old days. I would like to see our education system vastly improved, so that it provides a great education for every student. I would like to see American education become more professional, not less so. Where we part company is that I have concluded that the market will not produce those results.


Diane Ravitch is Research Professor of Education at New York University and a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. She is a historian of education.



:appl:

[open mind]

Are you telling me physics is one of those "crushing ways"? I can see this charge being levelled against the way humanities are taught in primary schools here (or, pretty much anywhere) but certainly not science. I remember being quite disgusted by the pro-US slant of my high school history classes (they were teaching things that I knew to be factually incorrect). But that is common to most countries: it isn't like any of educational systems is entirely free of bias.

quit putting words in my mouth......i was talking about native american philosophy and you assume i'm talking about the western understanding of physics?

i can't help but believe that you have zero understanding of the history of mathematics in the americas if you don't know that the concept of zero was invented by the "primitive" americans.

[boxingwithstars]

Florida: "let's pay teachers less and make standardized test scores the deciding factor in whether or not they get a raise. SCORE!" (http://www.newsherald.com/news/florida-82509-passes-senate.html)

this state depresses me...

[saysmydoctor]

Merit-based pay isn't fair, and I don't support it.

[boxingwithstars]

care to elaborate?

[saysmydoctor]

How you can punish a teacher because their students aren't performing when the institution itself isn't completely conducive for quality performance? Not to mention, when you want to judge a teacher's merit by a multiple choice test? These standardized tests aren't good metrics at all for student performance.

[boxingwithstars]

i completely agree with you on that, but i don't think merit pay in itself is a bad thing. it's just the fact that we're basing teacher performance on a broken system of standardized tests that's bad. i think good teachers should be paid more, but letting student performance on multiple choice tests be the one and only deciding factor is an awful idea.

[saysmydoctor]

Well, yes, I probably should have clarified that it's not inherently bad, just doesn't mesh well with the current framework.

[EasySkankin]

How you can punish a teacher because their students aren't performing when the institution itself isn't completely conducive for quality performance? Not to mention, when you want to judge a teacher's merit by a multiple choice test? These standardized tests aren't good metrics at all for student performance.

once in the classroom, it doesn't really matter how the institution operates, a good teacher is one that makes students feel comfortable and motivates them to learn and do well in the subject matter.

[caveBEAR]

once in the classroom, it doesn't really matter how the institution operates, a good teacher is one that makes students feel comfortable and motivates them to learn and do well in the subject matter.

Gross over-generalization.

[macabre]

Gross over-generalization.

Once on the court, it doesn't really matter how the sports program operates, a good coach is one that makes the players feel comfortable and motivates them to score and effectively run plays.

http://moviesmedia.ign.com/movies/image/article/860/860456/coach_carterposter_1205876425.jpg

[saysmydoctor]

once in the classroom, it doesn't really matter how the institution operates, a good teacher is one that makes students feel comfortable and motivates them to learn and do well in the subject matter.
Not remotely correct.

[saysmydoctor]

http://www.ctmirror.org/story/5244/state-supreme-court-rules-school-funding-case
CT is constitutionally required to provide a quality education

[macabre]

Not remotely correct.

What are the chances of the Public Higher Education Empowerment and Innovation Act passing?

[wrppdarndyrfngr]

Delaware and Tennessee win "Race to the Top" grant money


'Race to the Top' actually forcing states to run

(http://feeds.voices.washingtonpost.com/click.phdo?i=ddefea3ea89c7ed4339d0a 3b8fef93f4)
Moments ago, President Barack Obama signed the reconciliation bill reforming the student loan system and expanding Pell grants into law. But the most interesting education news is elsewhere: The administration has announced the winners in the first round of “Race to the Top” grants, and only two states, Delaware and Tennessee, made the cut.
Race to the Top is a $4.35 billion grant program created in the stimulus package. You can read the official description here (http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/fact-sheet-race-top), but the short version is that the states submit proposals to improve their education system to the federal government, and if the Feds approve, the states get a pot o' money with which to implement the plan. The idea isn't just to fund public schools, but to use the promise of federal money in a time of strapped state budgets to empower reformers. The program has garnered bipartisan praise, including a glowing column (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/23/opinion/23brooks.html) from David Brooks.
But it's hard to say no to states. A lot of people worried that the government wouldn't be very rigorous in its selection process, so there'd be little incentive for states to work for the funds. Think again. Out of 16 finalists, the administration only gave money to two of them (which, as Jay Matthews notes (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/class-struggle/2010/03/delaware_tennessee_on_hot_seat.html ), will make the results easier to track). That means there's more than $3 billion left in the pot. And the efforts made by the winners are instructive: Tennessee's legislature, for instance, met in two special sessions and passed a law lifting the cap on charter schools. It also got endorsements from 93 percent of the state's teachers unions.
This is empowering reformers in other states to demand similar efforts. New York finished second-to-last, leading Mike Bloomberg to criticize the state legislature for not lifting its cap on charter schools. "We are not going to qualify unless the state understands this," he said. And that's where the promise of the program really lies: Using the money to get the states to make legislative changes they wouldn't otherwise make, and unite stakeholders who wouldn't otherwise come together. The fact that states are in particularly desperate financial times also means the promise of federal money exerts a stronger pull than would ordinarily be the case.
Now the competition goes to a second round, and states that want the money know what they need to do, and know the administration won't give them funds if they don't do it. And in the 2011 budget, the government asked for another pot of money to run another round of these grants, this time letting non-state entities like communities compete. And so it will go. Traditionally, the federal government has had trouble doing much on education because they have a lot less power over it than people think. Most of the important decisions are made at the state and local level. The Obama administration is using federal money to influence that decision-making. And if they keep being this tough about who gets the grants, it just might work.

[loveisdead]

I found this kinda interesting.
Texas officials filed a lawsuit Thursday against the U.S. Department of Education, seeking to overturn the federal agency's rejection of the state's application for more than $830 million in aid that has been tied up in political wrangling.

A state-specific provision inserted into a federal law by a Democratic Texas congressman requires that Republican Gov. Rick Perry promise Texas will maintain certain education spending levels through 2013 in order to get the funds. Perry has called the requirement unconstitutional because the Texas Constitution prohibits him from committing future state spending.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/09/23/texas-education-funding-federal-lawsuit_n_737474.html

[Jason Tate]

I found this kinda interesting.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/09/23/texas-education-funding-federal-lawsuit_n_737474.html
I read Texas and figured it'd be something stupid. Hahah.

[mcm1610]

Maybe they can get their money when they undo their textbook nonsense. What they did is so offensive.

Although I don't use textbooks anyway, but other teachers do.

[dtrzcin]

Texas rewrites (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/12/texas-education-board-app_n_497440.html) history.

This makes me so mad.

[deFobbed14yrs]

This makes me so mad.

I know I read that on my friend's facebook wall and I just shook my head through out the entire article.

So attn. everyone, we will not elect anyone from Texas into a higher elected position ever again, ok? Ok??


Also, we need to get rid of NY teacher unions. MY 8th grade guitar teacher/child molester is probably still in some rubber room somewhere.

[saysmydoctor]

They closed the rubber rooms down.

But NYSUT heard you say that and their satellites are currently trained on your house.

You're fucked.

[mcm1610]

Haha

Those rubber rooms were absurd.

I have a lot of teacher friends that are anti-union. They really do allow shitty teachers to get comfortable doing nothing. There's two teachers at a district I sub in who are about 64 years old and are just cruising by with something like a $98,000 salary while they read the newspaper and have all 5 sections they teach do a work sheet that takes a third of the period. That's bullshit, no one learns from that, but what can you do since they are embedded so deeply in the system?

I don't know what the best solution is, since there is the fear and insecurity of year-to-year contracts which gets proposed often, but that's the best way to keep teachers trying. But what keeps a principal from just not offering a teacher a contract one year after they butted heads on what direction the school should be moving in?

[saysmydoctor]

Is that an argument against tenure, because it sounds like one?

[Jake Gyllenhaal]

As someone with several close friends in their 20s working as teachers (whom I have many respects), ineffective, lazy teachers shouldn't be teaching. I had a social science teacher in the seventh grade who was in her 70s.... while we were learning about central American and Caribbean countries, we spent three days watching Cool Runnings (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0106611/) to learn about the geography of Jamaica (keep in mind a majority of that beloved movie takes place at the Olympics in Canada)

[oliviazhang]

More money isn't what we need; it's a restructuring of how we spend the money we have. In Charlotte, a lot of the poorest schools have really nice technology in the classrooms, but no talented teachers. One of my ideas is to give bonuses to teachers who teach in lower SES areas. That will encourage future educators to get the training necessary to succeed in these schools.

Also, every state should have a Teaching Fellows program. It's one of the few good things I see in NC's education system.
agree, I think teachers count most. I still remember some of my college teachers who are not as qualified as I expect, and my scores of these lessons is realy poor.

[The Indigo]

Is that an argument against tenure, because it sounds like one?
I'm strongly against tenure.

[saysmydoctor]

agree, I think teachers count most. I still remember some of my college teachers who are not as qualified as I expect, and my scores of these lessons is realy poor.
Teachers make a difference, they aren't the end-all of education.
I'm strongly against tenure.
Do you even know what it is?

[mcm1610]

Is that an argument against tenure, because it sounds like one?

Yes, even though I know I'd benefit from it.

[saysmydoctor]

I think people have a very poor understanding of what tenure actually is. It doesn't equate to teacher permanence and make a teacher untouchable.

[The Indigo]

Teachers make a difference, they aren't the end-all of education.

Do you even know what it is?
Education major, bruh.

[saysmydoctor]

Education major, bruh.
Is that supposed to be an answer to my question, because it reads more like an appeal to authority.

[The Indigo]

Is that supposed to be an answer to my question, because it reads more like an appeal to authority.
I know what tenure is. I am very much against it, even as a future educator.

[saysmydoctor]

I know what tenure is. I am very much against it, even as a future educator.
Okay. What is it?

[The Indigo]

Okay. What is it?
In NC, after you teach for four years and do a bunch of stuff to prove you're decent, you're granted tenure, which basically = more academic freedom and extra protection from your school system. No, teachers aren't untouchable, but they're difficult to fire when they're tenured.

[saysmydoctor]

In NC, after you teach for four years and do a bunch of stuff to prove you're decent, you're granted tenure, which basically = more academic freedom and extra protection from your school system. No, teachers aren't untouchable, but they're difficult to fire when they're tenured.
See, I find this a flawed explanation. I see tenure as unnecessary in general--why do newer teachers not have the same rights as tenured teachers? Why aren't all teachers allowed due process when it comes to their termination? Why only tenured teachers? It almost seems like a constitutional issue, to me at least.

And it's not hard to fire someone--you just have to have a reason (http://definitions.uslegal.com/t/tenure/). And if you can't come up with a reason, that's not the teacher's fault--that's the district/school administration's fault.

I went to high school in California and can recall at least three tenured teachers being fired. Not exactly representative of the system at large, but just my own personal experience with it.

I'm all for teacher accountability, I don't think tenure is the reason there is a lack of accountability. Fire bad teachers. Keep good ones. Give due process to all teachers, good or bad. That's how it should work. Tenure isn't the problem, though.

[The Indigo]

See, I find this a flawed explanation. I see tenure as unnecessary in general--why do newer teachers not have the same rights as tenured teachers? Why aren't all teachers allowed due process when it comes to their termination? Why only tenured teachers? It almost seems like a constitutional issue, to me at least.

And it's not hard to fire someone--you just have to have a reason (http://definitions.uslegal.com/t/tenure/). And if you can't come up with a reason, that's not the teacher's fault--that's the district/school administration's fault.

I went to high school in California and can recall at least three tenured teachers being fired. Not exactly representative of the system at large, but just my own personal experience with it.

I'm all for teacher accountability, I don't think tenure is the reason there is a lack of accountability. Fire bad teachers. Keep good ones. Give due process to all teachers, good or bad. That's how it should work. Tenure isn't the problem, though.
The problem is that since a tenured teacher is so much more difficult to fire, especially if they're a part of a union, most school systems won't even pursue getting rid of a tenured teacher unless they royally fuck up (beat/abuse a child). Poorer school systems simply can't afford to get rid of a tenured teacher. Because of that, I was taught mostly by "old birds," as we call them, that have been using the same powerpoint for twenty years, have completely lost touch with the changing landscape of education, and have little to no knowledge of new educational technology. Also, as long as there is a tenure, you'll never see a decent pay raise for teachers. The government doesn't want to pay $100,000 a year to an employee it might not be able to fire if they aren't performing.

[saysmydoctor]

You're citing problems with bad teachers. There are tenured teachers who aren't like that--who actually evolve with the ages.

Again, tenure isn't the source of the problem here. It's bad teachers. They just happen to benefit from tenure as well.

[The Indigo]

I know there are good tenured teachers. But the system allows way too many bad teachers to remain in their position. In NC, it's almost a guarantee that if a school fires a tenured teacher who didn't molest/beat a child, the principal, school, and school system will all be sued. There isn't a district in the state that can afford to fight those kinds of lawsuits with every shitty teacher who's currently, for all intents and purposes, untouchable. It takes the spots of new, talented teachers who could come in and do twice the job the bad ones do. When cuts come, the new teachers, the ones with the freshest ideas and strategies, are the ones who are let go first, since the school system doesn't want to get sued by letting go of the 60 year old who steal teachers the same way she taught when she first started.

I understand that there are good teachers who are tenured, but the system does more bad than good. It keeps teacher pay low and protects teachers who should be fired. The school system should ditch tenure and just start offering some similar program to teachers who prove their worth, not through the standardized test scores of their students, but through peer reviewed observations. Make it so they have to be reviewed once every, let's say, four years. Require that teachers attend seminars on new educational technology, theories, and methods, and use the observations to make sure they're applying these new strategies in the classroom.

The only benefit I see to tenure is that it's one of the few financial benefits that attracts people to the profession, but anyone who decides they want to teach because they know they'd basically get to sit on their ass after four years does not need to be a teacher anyway. I'd rather have 50 students in a class with one talented teacher than to give half of them over to someone who doesn't give a shit enough about them to keep up with the constantly changing theories and methods of the field.

[saysmydoctor]

Two things:

One, I think we have a fundamental disagreement over where the blame lies: you seem to focus it more on the teacher and I blame it on the institution in which they have to work in. I could expand on this if you'd like.

Two, I think teachers have the tendency to "hype" themselves, overstate their importance, worry too much about replenishing their ranks, and not enough about the students. And I don't even blame them for that. Their job puts food on table. Gotta survive--probably why they are fighting (and losing critically in a lot of places) to save the perks like tenure (though I still think people are little hyperbolic about it). The profession is shit and yet people still want to go into it. Sigh.

[The Indigo]

To point #1 - I'll be the first person to blame the institution. Everyone knows the education system in this country is disgustingly awful in some places. I feel as if half the people blame the teachers and half blame the institution. I can honestly say that, although shitty school systems probably hold most of the blame, there are some really useless teachers out there. A good portion of them have been beaten down within the system so much that they no longer feel useful. We agree on that issue; the institution is, for the most part, the major failure in this situation. However, when it comes to the specific matter of tenure, I believe that if a teacher is not evolving with the system they should be released. I'm not an advocate of merit pay or firing teachers who never had a chance to succeed with their students thanks to the school in which they taught, but there is a large population of old birds out there dragging the system down, sitting on their tenure salary while new teachers get laid off every year. Tenure does more harm than good.

To point #2 - I believe there is no more important aspect to education than the teacher. A lot of that probably has to do with the fact that I'm going into that field, but I honestly believe a talented, well-informed, passionate teacher is the most vital piece of the puzzle of education. Give a classroom a ton of technology, money, and parent involvement and it means nothing without a good teacher at the helm. Give a classroom nothing but a blackboard and a few textbooks and a good teacher could make something out of that (but it's such a discouraging, impossibly trying environment that very few can). If I had the chance to make one policy law in education, it'd be to get rid of tenure so the aging teachers could be purged and future teachers would know that the only security in one's job is to possess a passion for the knowledge of it. If there were a group of doctors out there performing surgery with methods from the 80's, 70's, and even 60's and refused to evolve, you'd want them fired, right? Should work the same way with education.

[saysmydoctor]

To point #1 - I'll be the first person to blame the institution. Everyone knows the education system in this country is disgustingly awful in some places. I feel as if half the people blame the teachers and half blame the institution. I can honestly say that, although shitty school systems probably hold most of the blame, there are some really useless teachers out there. A good portion of them have been beaten down within the system so much that they no longer feel useful. We agree on that issue; the institution is, for the most part, the major failure in this situation. However, when it comes to the specific matter of tenure, I believe that if a teacher is not evolving with the system they should be released. I'm not an advocate of merit pay or firing teachers who never had a chance to succeed with their students thanks to the school in which they taught, but there is a large population of old birds out there dragging the system down, sitting on their tenure salary while new teachers get laid off every year. Tenure does more harm than good.

To point #2 - I believe there is no more important aspect to education than the teacher. A lot of that probably has to do with the fact that I'm going into that field, but I honestly believe a talented, well-informed, passionate teacher is the most vital piece of the puzzle of education. Give a classroom a ton of technology, money, and parent involvement and it means nothing without a good teacher at the helm. Give a classroom nothing but a blackboard and a few textbooks and a good teacher could make something out of that (but it's such a discouraging, impossibly trying environment that very few can). If I had the chance to make one policy law in education, it'd be to get rid of tenure so the aging teachers could be purged and future teachers would know that the only security in one's job is to possess a passion for the knowledge of it. If there were a group of doctors out there performing surgery with methods from the 80's, 70's, and even 60's and refused to evolve, you'd want them fired, right? Should work the same way with education.
Why should a teacher evolve with the system (besides for the kids' sake)? The system doesn't even evolve with the system. The profession has become about surviving within it and tenure is a part of that. You can't reform compensation until you change the environment. Teachers are a product of their environment. When it's a fiercely competitive, look out for yourself sort of setting, that's what those teachers will do. They will do bar none, cling to tenure, and maintain their job security while not changing their ways because that's what they need to do in order to get by.

You're placing way too much blame and importance on tenure--it's ridiculously hyperbolic and borderline obnoxious--in the same vein of how teachers seek to defend it without acknowledging its faults. You're extrapolating a lot from a little and it's leading to generalization. Tenure isn't a problem. It doesn't rank that high on the scale though. I mean, you would change tenure first--I would probably shift us away from this standardized-test based approach we are going for.

Also, doctors are way better compensated to do so--where's the incentives for teachers? The job already dominates their lives, living little room for a personal life--sometimes having to pay out of their own pocket for materials to bring to the classroom because the district doesn't provide. I've been considering teaching as a profession for a while and the biggest con for me is that I'm given a shitton of responsibility and next to nothing in the way of resources.

You can get rid of tenure--bad teachers will still remain and the system will still be broken. DCPS being a prime example.

[jawstheme]

Why should a teacher evolve with the system (besides for the kids' sake)? The system doesn't even evolve with the system. The profession has become about surviving within it and tenure is a part of that. You can't reform compensation until you change the environment. Teachers are a product of their environment. When it's a fiercely competitive, look out for yourself sort of setting, that's what those teachers will do. They will do bar none, cling to tenure, and maintain their job security while not changing their ways because that's what they need to do in order to get by.

You're placing way too much blame and importance on tenure--it's ridiculously hyperbolic and borderline obnoxious--in the same vein of how teachers seek to defend it without acknowledging its faults. You're extrapolating a lot from a little and it's leading to generalization. Tenure isn't a problem. It doesn't rank that high on the scale though. I mean, you would change tenure first--I would probably shift us away from this standardized-test based approach we are going for.

Also, doctors are way better compensated to do so--where's the incentives for teachers? The job already dominates their lives, living little room for a personal life--sometimes having to pay out of their own pocket for materials to bring to the classroom because the district doesn't provide. I've been considering teaching as a profession for a while and the biggest con for me is that I'm given a shitton of responsibility and next to nothing in the way of resources.

You can get rid of tenure--bad teachers will still remain and the system will still be broken. DCPS being a prime example.

This isn't true for the teachers I know. They get summers and holidays off and the pay is pretty good also. They go on great vacations and I see them out on weekends often, sometimes on weekdays. They tell me how great it is to get all this time off. Half the teachers I know smoke pot. Hell, I know 4 teachers who went to All Good Festival this year, did acid, and had a great time. I just don't see your point in the real world. Doctors should be compensated because they do work all the time. They're on call a lot, and they have a lot more liability than teachers. Plus, it is very difficult to be a doctor, where a lot of people I graduated college with are going back to get their masters in education because it's not a difficult masters compared to anything else, and it's paying well right now compared to most jobs because of this down economy. Franky, most of those people are going to make awful teachers, but they'll fit right in with all the other awful teachers already there.

[saysmydoctor]

You found the outlier then. Because the summers off thing is a myth and the pay pretty much universally sucks.

Also, there is a lot of liability with teachers. Just because what they do isn't invasive like doctors...well, the numbers speak for themselves.

[Neo Cassady]

Because the summers off thing is a myth and the pay pretty much universally sucks.

1) Summers are spent planning/preparing for the next year, and attending professional development (e.g., conferences, grad classes). Not free time to sleep in and go to the beach all summer, but not terribly busy either. A lot of teachers have summer jobs to stay busy, even though most districts will ration out the paychecks over 12 months.

2) I get paid well enough to live on with room to save, and I'm in one of the state's lower paying districts. When my fiancée is finished with grad school and gets a job as a school counselor (most of whom make teachers' pay), our combined household income will put us in the top 25% nationally. Put us in a more "average" district and we're in the top 20%. And the pay goes up by ~$1500 a year with experience. Not too shabby.

[jawstheme]

You found the outlier then. Because the summers off thing is a myth and the pay pretty much universally sucks.

Also, there is a lot of liability with teachers. Just because what they do isn't invasive like doctors...well, the numbers speak for themselves.

Maybe because I live in a rural town? I kow that the pay scale isn't much different from urban to rural towns, so I'm guessing that even though teachers here are middle to upple middle class, teachers in and around cities may be in the lower middle class. But, I know that atleast where I live teachers have it pretty good, and I'm not saying they shouldn't. I think everyone should have it pretty good.

[mcm1610]

Curious, what state is that, and what is the starting pay there?

[jawstheme]

Starting is about $35,000 and average is about $54,000. Where I live $35,000 starting out in any job is pretty damn good, plust teacher benefits are top notch. I just got laid off from a job making $9 an hour as a counselor for troubled youths. Benefits, but shitty benefits. My friends that got 4 year teaching degrees are living the life compared to my 4 year psych and HR double major. Go me.

Oh, source for the salary http://teacherportal.com/salary/Pennsylvania-teacher-salary

[mcm1610]

Whoops, I was referring to the post above yours and hadn't realized you posted in between.

Starting here for public schools is between 32,000 and 38,000. You can top off just under 100,000, but that's when you're a grandparent.

[jawstheme]

Whoops, I was referring to the post above yours and hadn't realized you posted in between.

Starting here for public schools is between 32,000 and 38,000. You can top off just under 100,000, but that's when you're a grandparent.

100,000 is damn good. Hell, $70,000 is damn good when you're getting a pension, which, on another note, is becoming a major problem: http://www.delcotimes.com/articles/2010/04/14/news/doc4bc52c8c0d30d132270494.txt

These pensions are going to be too much to pay. When they were put in place they were necessary because teachers were making so little. Now I think they should be using 401K plans like everyone else.

[Zeran]

i was considering possibly going into education, but in the past 2-3 years, from the info i've been getting, it sounds like a bad idea.

[saysmydoctor]

1) Summers are spent planning/preparing for the next year, and attending professional development (e.g., conferences, grad classes). Not free time to sleep in and go to the beach all summer, but not terribly busy either. A lot of teachers have summer jobs to stay busy, even though most districts will ration out the paychecks over 12 months.

2) I get paid well enough to live on with room to save, and I'm in one of the state's lower paying districts. When my fiancée is finished with grad school and gets a job as a school counselor (most of whom make teachers' pay), our combined household income will put us in the top 25% nationally. Put us in a more "average" district and we're in the top 20%. And the pay goes up by ~$1500 a year with experience. Not too shabby.
Yeah that was my point.

I'd be interested to find out what state this is. Also, I'm obviously generalizing the system entirely, some states treat their teachers better while some just don't have the resources to do so.

[mcm1610]

i was considering possibly going into education, but in the past 2-3 years, from the info i've been getting, it sounds like a bad idea.

Go into teaching if you think you'd love it, or you love kids, or something like that. Don't do it because, "oh, you only work 9 months!" or any of the other "perks". If you really love it, then you can tough out a few years while hiring is down. This goes for any job, really.

As someone who absolutely loves being in the classroom, I get so aggravated at the people who fall back on teaching because they didn't know what else to do and they half-ass it. They cheat the students so bad when they do that.

[The Indigo]

Agreed. The ones who go into it mostly for the "perks" are the ones who will most often not make great teachers. Those, you can't blame on "the system beating them down." A lot of good teachers lose faith once they're actually in the classroom, which is why Education classes these days deal so heavily with understanding the system and having a ton of clinical hours, but I can tell which people just don't have the right motivation to be teachers. That's a part of why I want to get rid of tenure. It's a benefit to teachers who deserve it, but there are a lot of detriments as well, detriments, I believe, that outweigh the positives.

[The Indigo]

Why should a teacher evolve with the system (besides for the kids' sake)? The system doesn't even evolve with the system. The profession has become about surviving within it and tenure is a part of that. You can't reform compensation until you change the environment. Teachers are a product of their environment. When it's a fiercely competitive, look out for yourself sort of setting, that's what those teachers will do. They will do bar none, cling to tenure, and maintain their job security while not changing their ways because that's what they need to do in order to get by.
That's the best and only reason. As the system changes, teachers must change with it in order to best educate their students. If one isn't willing to do that, they should find a new job. There's no doubt that the system is fucked, and liberals tend to always blame the system while conservatives tend to always blame the teacher, but it's a two-way street. For every fucked up part of the system, there is a wealth of literature available on how to survive in it as an educator and continue serving your students. Like I said before, if there's a teacher who isn't willing to do that for their students, then they're not a good teacher.

You're placing way too much blame and importance on tenure--it's ridiculously hyperbolic and borderline obnoxious--in the same vein of how teachers seek to defend it without acknowledging its faults. You're extrapolating a lot from a little and it's leading to generalization. Tenure isn't a problem. It doesn't rank that high on the scale though. I mean, you would change tenure first--I would probably shift us away from this standardized-test based approach we are going for.
I would change tenure first because I believe there's no more important aspect to education besides the teacher. You get rid of tenure, you're able to fire teachers who the system has left behind (who are, thusly, leaving their students behind). With tenure out of the picture, the rally for higher pay (I'm talking six digits) will be a much easier one to fight, attracting more skilled college students to seek education as a career, knowing that there isn't a system of tenure to protect them and let them get lazy. The heavy focus on standardized tests sucks, but like I said earlier, there are so many articles, case studies, and methods available to truly educate and serve students in that environment, that to see a teacher who refuses to do that for their students is frankly disgusting.

Also, doctors are way better compensated to do so--where's the incentives for teachers? The job already dominates their lives, living little room for a personal life--sometimes having to pay out of their own pocket for materials to bring to the classroom because the district doesn't provide. I've been considering teaching as a profession for a while and the biggest con for me is that I'm given a shitton of responsibility and next to nothing in the way of resources.

You can get rid of tenure--bad teachers will still remain and the system will still be broken. DCPS being a prime example.
That all depends on your district (and even your school) and that, to me, is the biggest flaw of the system. I did clinical hours at Bishop Spaugh Community Academy in Charlotte's inner-city last year. It's the lowest performing middle school in the state. Their teachers had very little resources and, like you pointed out, had to buy a lot of their materials themselves. However, ten minutes down the road is Myer's Park High School, which is in Charlotte's most affluent neighborhood (also where I go to college, holla). The teachers there are really cooperative and help each other out when it comes to resources and the school is able to provide way more than at BSCA. BSCA is the school that really needs the fresh, evolved teachers, but the old birds there are clinging to their tenure, underserving their students, and keeping the school in a perpetual state of failure, which further cripples the chances of any young teachers coming in (not many people want to work in an underperforming school right out of college, although I do).

For them, it trickles down: the system fucks the teachers, the teachers fucks the students (that sounds dirty), and the students underperformance fucks the school. It's cyclic. As an educator, one has to acknowledge that the only place they have to stop this cycle is in how they educate their students. Read the literature, keep up with the changing environment, evolve with the system for the sake of your students. It sucks, but if one goes into the field for the right reasons, they know they have no other choice. Anyone going into the system knows these things. It's no longer a surprise to see it on Day 1 of student teaching. We just have to keep voting for the right people, rallying for changes in the system, etc. but until that happens, educators need to do their absolute best for their students or find a new job.

[mcm1610]

A big problem in this area (and I can only argue for this area) is that districts are far too small. My town has two high schools (public) that hold ~2,000 and ~1,200 students. The next town has one high school, but a village inside it has 3 of its own, and another disctrict borders the two towns and has students from each in it. In the full two towns, there are 6 public high schools in three districts. Each raises its own funding through taxes. Each hires its own teachers.

Because of all this, there is a ton of competition between districts and no one wants to share. Therefore, a rich village like Williamsville can buy the best shit ever for its students and attract the best teachers with its awesome pay scale and teaching environment, while 15 minutes away, Cheektowaga Central (which is one of 3 districts in Cheektowaga) fights for 10 Mac computers and a handfull of old-ass PCs and has teachers still using overhead projectors.

Districts need to be larger so they average out the schools and they can share resources.

[saysmydoctor]

That's a general New York State problem. We have 62 counties but over 250 BoEs. My dad was a old Marine recruiter up in Plattsburgh and operated in like 7-10 counties in the area....and worked with some 50 different BoEs.

[Zeran]

Go into teaching if you think you'd love it, or you love kids, or something like that. Don't do it because, "oh, you only work 9 months!" or any of the other "perks". If you really love it, then you can tough out a few years while hiring is down. This goes for any job, really.

As someone who absolutely loves being in the classroom, I get so aggravated at the people who fall back on teaching because they didn't know what else to do and they half-ass it. They cheat the students so bad when they do that.

i wasn't really thinking about the perks, so to speak. more like, i want to educate people and make a difference, despite how corny that sounds. although i don't really like kids that much (i mean in a teacher-student kind of situation), which would put a damper on it. what i want to do is get my phd and teach university on the side, but if i can get a decent job teaching like seniors in high school or something, then that might work too. except both of these scenarios may end up sucking.

[saysmydoctor]

Chait on teachers' unions.
(http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-chait/78066/in-defense-waiting-superman)

[mcm1610]

From the sounds of it, you don't seem enthusiastic, and I would stay away.

[The Indigo]

In my home county, teachers are (practically) required to join one of the two unions available to them.

[mcm1610]

That's how it is here. You can't be a public school teacher and not be in NYSUT or whatever the other one is, depending on what district you're in. I even had to join one just to substitute teach.

[boxingwithstars]

This isn't true for the teachers I know. They get summers and holidays off and the pay is pretty good also. They go on great vacations and I see them out on weekends often, sometimes on weekdays. They tell me how great it is to get all this time off. Half the teachers I know smoke pot. Hell, I know 4 teachers who went to All Good Festival this year, did acid, and had a great time. I just don't see your point in the real world. Doctors should be compensated because they do work all the time. They're on call a lot, and they have a lot more liability than teachers. Plus, it is very difficult to be a doctor, where a lot of people I graduated college with are going back to get their masters in education because it's not a difficult masters compared to anything else, and it's paying well right now compared to most jobs because of this down economy. Franky, most of those people are going to make awful teachers, but they'll fit right in with all the other awful teachers already there.

1. Depending on the district/school, teachers could have a 9/10-month salary or a 12-month salary. But because even the wealthiest schools have been forced to cut huge chunks of the the budget, most schools are switching to the 10-month salary. This means non-teacher work days where there is no school, holidays, and summers are unpaid. Some school districts with 10-month salaries will ration your pay so you still receive pay checks over the summer, and others do not. So most of the teachers I know don't get long summer breaks to spend with their families and take amazing vacations, they pick up a second job during the summer so they can get by.

And $35-$40,000 is not an amazing salary. Yes, it will be great for me when I graduate college and start teaching because I don't have a family, a mortgage, car payments, and the only thing I have to worry about is rent and student loan debt. And yeah, it's great just to have a job right now. But take into consideration how difficult it is to receive pay raises as a teacher, and that a lot of veteran teachers are STILL making close to what they started at even after years of proving they're the best at what they do. We want to inflict merit pay on teachers that judges them based on their student's standardized test scores instead of actually paying them for their merits. Getting your masters in education only guarantees you about $1,500 more a year in most districts. That's a fraction of what it costs to even go to grad school, which is why a lot of teachers aren't motivated to go back and continue their education.

2. Just because you know teachers who smoke pot does not mean they have it "so good." It just means they're not that bright and they've gotten away with it so far. Trust me, even in the best school district where teachers are treated like kings and queens (and this school district doesn't really exist in America) they will lose their job or AT LEAST be put on probation if they're caught in possession of marijuana or any other drugs.

3. The reason we have so many low quality teachers is because people assume education is an easy field. They assume it's an easy field because they have heard it's easy to get a degree in education. I'm an Education major and I'm in my senior year of college, I'm interning right now and I have been a substitute in the past. I can tell you that they don't teach you everything you need to know to be a good teacher in college. It's impossible to prepare someone completely for this job. If we paid teachers more to begin with and gave them the credit they deserve, maybe their job would be taken a little more seriously. Our society constantly treats education as a joke, and that's why it attracts so many people who are not serious about the profession.

[jawstheme]

1. Depending on the district/school, teachers could have a 9/10-month salary or a 12-month salary. But because even the wealthiest schools have been forced to cut huge chunks of the the budget, most schools are switching to the 10-month salary. This means non-teacher work days where there is no school, holidays, and summers are unpaid. Some school districts with 10-month salaries will ration your pay so you still receive pay checks over the summer, and others do not. So most of the teachers I know don't get long summer breaks to spend with their families and take amazing vacations, they pick up a second job during the summer so they can get by.

And $35-$40,000 is not an amazing salary. Yes, it will be great for me when I graduate college and start teaching because I don't have a family, a mortgage, car payments, and the only thing I have to worry about is rent and student loan debt. And yeah, it's great just to have a job right now. But take into consideration how difficult it is to receive pay raises as a teacher, and that a lot of veteran teachers are STILL making close to what they started at even after years of proving they're the best at what they do. We want to inflict merit pay on teachers that judges them based on their student's standardized test scores instead of actually paying them for their merits. Getting your masters in education only guarantees you about $1,500 more a year in most districts. That's a fraction of what it costs to even go to grad school, which is why a lot of teachers aren't motivated to go back and continue their education.

2. Just because you know teachers who smoke pot does not mean they have it "so good." It just means they're not that bright and they've gotten away with it so far. Trust me, even in the best school district where teachers are treated like kings and queens (and this school district doesn't really exist in America) they will lose their job or AT LEAST be put on probation if they're caught in possession of marijuana or any other drugs.

3. The reason we have so many low quality teachers is because people assume education is an easy field. They assume it's an easy field because they have heard it's easy to get a degree in education. I'm an Education major and I'm in my senior year of college, I'm interning right now and I have been a substitute in the past. I can tell you that they don't teach you everything you need to know to be a good teacher in college. It's impossible to prepare someone completely for this job. If we paid teachers more to begin with and gave them the credit they deserve, maybe their job would be taken a little more seriously. Our society constantly treats education as a joke, and that's why it attracts so many people who are not serious about the profession.

I agree with you, except that I think they are piad fairly, atleast in PA, which is the only state I really know about. I don't see how more pay and more credit would deter people from getting into education because they think its good money with lots of perks. Since you are going to be a teacher, I'm not entirely sure you're looking at that objectively.

[jawstheme]

Do you think it's right that teachers don't get drug tested? You say they'll get caught eventually by a posession charge, but I just don't think that is a good way to look at solving the problem.

[mcm1610]

Most people who are informed will tell you it takes a minimum of 3 years on the job, usually around 5 if not more, before one can really call himself an expert teacher. Teacher training needs to be tougher, especially in states that aren't the big hand full (NY, MA, PA, CA, MI, etc) that place a large emphasis on education. After student teaching, there needs to be a huge mentorship program which is really just taking traction in NYS.

It's those same states that pay their teachers well, because they know they have gone through better training than the rest of the country. There's a reason a teacher from NY can move anywhere and teach, but if you're in West Virginia, you've got to prove to the rest of the country you can actually do something beneficial in the classroom.

[boxingwithstars]

I agree with you, except that I think they are piad fairly, atleast in PA, which is the only state I really know about. I don't see how more pay and more credit would deter people from getting into education because they think its good money with lots of perks. Since you are going to be a teacher, I'm not entirely sure you're looking at that objectively.

I'm not saying they should raise their salaries to deter people away from teaching, I'm saying that good teachers should have higher salaries regardless because they should be paid fairly for the difficult and important work they're doing. Instead most states pay all teachers relatively the same, whether they're good or bad. Giving pay raises to quality teachers should be a no brainer, but unfortunately in a lot of schools it's not common practice.

The point I was trying to make is that we need to stop looking at Education as an easy way to obtain a college degree. It shouldn't be too easy to become a teacher, because it's not an easy job. Why don't we train teachers in school just as hard as we train doctors and lawyers? If we did, we'd probably have less bad teachers in the system.

Do you think it's right that teachers don't get drug tested? You say they'll get caught eventually by a posession charge, but I just don't think that is a good way to look at solving the problem.

I don't see any problem with drug testing teachers (except of course for finding the money to pay for it). I have to get drug tested as a substitute teacher, I don't know why we shouldn't drug test full time teachers?

And yeah, they might never get caught and expelled from the school system. But if they are caught, they're going to be in a lot of trouble. I just meant that it's not like one of the perks to being a teacher is you can smoke all the pot you want and get away with it!

[jawstheme]

I'm not saying they should raise their salaries to deter people away from teaching, I'm saying that good teachers should have higher salaries regardless because they should be paid fairly for the difficult and important work they're doing. Instead most states pay all teachers relatively the same, whether they're good or bad. Giving pay raises to quality teachers should be a no brainer, but unfortunately in a lot of schools it's not common practice.

The point I was trying to make is that we need to stop looking at Education as an easy way to obtain a college degree. It shouldn't be too easy to become a teacher, because it's not an easy job. Why don't we train teachers in school just as hard as we train doctors and lawyers? If we did, we'd probably have less bad teachers in the system.



I don't see any problem with drug testing teachers (except of course for finding the money to pay for it). I have to get drug tested as a substitute teacher, I don't know why we shouldn't drug test full time teachers?

And yeah, they might never get caught and expelled from the school system. But if they are caught, they're going to be in a lot of trouble. I just meant that it's not like one of the perks to being a teacher is you can smoke all the pot you want and get away with it!

Oh alright. I misunderstood. I now fully agree with you.

[mcm1610]

You had to be drug tested to sub? I've never come across that around here. Public employees in general don't have to face drug tests as far as I know. I worked at the DOH with no drug test, three school districts, and my town's Youth, Parks, and Recreation department and have never been tested.

[caveBEAR]

You had to be drug tested to sub? I've never come across that around here. Public employees in general don't have to face drug tests as far as I know. I worked at the DOH with no drug test, three school districts, and my town's Youth, Parks, and Recreation department and have never been tested.

Not sure about the teachers, but my school district has been drug testing all of the people working at the extended day and summer camp programs; however, they're usually teenagers, so that's probably their reasoning.

[boxingwithstars]

You had to be drug tested to sub? I've never come across that around here. Public employees in general don't have to face drug tests as far as I know. I worked at the DOH with no drug test, three school districts, and my town's Youth, Parks, and Recreation department and have never been tested.

Yeah, but substitutes in the school district I work for are actually employed and managed by a temp agency. I don't know if it's the agency or the district that requires us to be drug tested. Now that I think about it, I also taught extended day and I wasn't required to be drug tested for that.

[caveBEAR]

Yeah, but substitutes in the school district I work for are actually employed and managed by a temp agency. I don't know if it's the agency or the district that requires us to be drug tested. Now that I think about it, I also taught extended day and I wasn't required to be drug tested for that.

Ha ha, that's the exact opposite as my school district.

[saysmydoctor]

What are everyone's thoughts on NBC's Education Nation?

[mcm1610]

I think I saw a commercial for it, but other than that, I have absolutely no idea.

[Neo Cassady]

Curious, what state is that, and what is the starting pay there?

Sorry for the late response. Ohio...and starting pay ranges from < $25k in the lowest paying districts to > $40k in the highest, with the average probably falling in the upper $30s. My district starts at about $32k.