Report suggests linking pay for teachers to kids' scores

[Khephra]

WASHINGTON -- A new report from a commission headed by former IBM Chairman Louis Gerstner Jr. offers a dim view of the nation's teaching force and calls for dramatic changes, including linking teacher pay to student test scores.

University graduates who earned low scores on their college-admission tests were more than twice as likely as top scorers to have majored in education. One in five new teachers will quit the profession within three years. And poor and minority kids who often need the most help in school get stuck with the least experienced teachers.

''Unless we as a nation make the decision that we are going to do everything we can to recruit and retain excellent teachers, the impact -- particularly for poor students -- is potentially devastating,'' said Gaynor McCown, a former teacher who is executive director of the Teaching Commission.

The 19-member commission, which includes business executives, educators, former governors and former first lady Barbara Bush, says improving teacher quality is ''the missing link'' in efforts to make schools better.

more............

http://www.suntimes.com/output/education/cst-nws-teach14.html

[ClintonTyree]

1. Good schools, books, supplies.............

after school programs.........but TEACHERS are the "missing link". If the same performance standards they advocate were applied to Bush, I think he owes the American public about $500 Billion.

[SharonAnn]

74. And link Dentist's pay to patients' numbers of cavities!

Sounds right to me!

[joeunderdog]

85. Read Molly Ivin's book "Bushwacked"

That pretty much sums up what a disaster Bush's performance based education system is.

[1floridademocrat]

2. And this..

will simply drive MORE teachers out.

My wife is a teacher, and from first hand knowledge the BIGGEST problem she and other teachers face is simply lack of parental involvement.

She estimates over 50% of her kids in her class parents, never chack on thier kids work, skip confrences, don't know what they are studying, and don't seem to care. A large precentage on top of that use teh school as free day care. School gets out at 1:45 (Don't ask, screwy county) Teachers can leave starting at 3:30, but what happens more often than not is parents simply don't bother picking up thier kids until after 4, meaning the teacher doesn't get to do anything but watch the kids, and thanks to a new rule, they can't also do any work OTHER than watching.. no lesson plans, no nothing.

There is a DRAMATIC diffrence between the kids whose parents are engaged in the education of thier children, and those whose parents don't seem to give a damn.

But tying teachers pay to the fact that a large number simply don't care, isn't going to solve anything, in fact it will ONLY make it worse.

[0007]

23. I agree, I was married for thirty years to a wonderful educator

She taught second grade and was the most dedicated person I've ever known. She was under paid and abused by parents that had screwed up children. The world will surely miss her.

Many years I've heard the same story you're relating to us here. Thank you.

If most Doctors, Attorneys and politicians were dedicated instead of being greedy, it would be a wonderful world.

[BenFranklinUSA]

40. If parents are partly responsible, then teachers don't need raises.

You cannot have it both ways.

Either the educational system accepts full responsibility,
or money needs to be put toward parental-incentives.

[1floridademocrat]

52. I'm not.

Trying to have it both ways..

I honestly dont think non teachers have a damn clue as to what its like for a normal teacher.

The mandatory testing craze has gotten out of hand.. My wife (and I) both don't really have an issue with minimum skills tests for passing. IE you fail the minimum skills test, you move on to next grade.

But tying in all the money just BREEDS the kind of thing that we don't need in education, the idea that it doesn't matter waht the kids LEARN, just as long as they do well on the test. Which in turn leads to kids which are LESS well educated, and makes public schools look worse.

I wonder if thats not the point anyways, to make public schools look bad, because they don't spout the ideology than the conservatives want them to.

as for teacher pay..thats a sham arguement.

Its ALWAYS taken 2 to give children a good education. Education MUST NOT STOP AT THE CLASSROOM DOOR. To bad in our country this is happening more and more, and the result is becoming more and more obvious.

Your arguement, that the educational system needs to take FULL RESPONSIBILTY FOR RASING CHILDREN(Because in effect thats your arguement.) in order to get money is, in fact.. the dumbest thing I've ever seen.

This is my BIGEST beef with the right wing.. THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT MONEY DOESN'T MATTER MOST IN.

Rasing a child is ONE of those things. Education is one of those things.

[MadHound]

55. Begging your pardon there

But for their education and experience, teachers are one of, if not the single most underpaid group of employees in this country. Let me spell it out for you bub. Four years of college, plus two years graduate. If you wish to advance further than being a cog, you need to get a Phd. On top of that you are required to attend seminars and take summer courses, in addition to having to study(and pass the test) for your state teaching certificate, some states on a yearly basis. All of this so that you can make $18,000 start, and maybe $50,000 if you stick around thirty years until retirement. Hell, there are garbage haulers that are making more the first day at work than teachers who've been working for ten years!

And what exactly are parental incentives? Is this another fancy name for vouchers? Sorry, but the vouchers route is the way towards creating a two tier system of education. Do you really want your child to attend a "school" where every single science subject is tinted with God? Where there can be no discussion of evolution because God created the world 6000 years ago?

No, quite frankly the parental incentives needed are a quick poke with a cattle prod. Parents expect that once they drop their child off at school that their responsiblity for the day is done. No need to check and see if homework is being done, no need to disipline their child(even though said child is hell on wheels), no need to interact with their child so as to stimulate their mind and the love of learning. Nope, just drop them off at the door and let the school take care of the rest. Except for sex ed, or tolerance, or disipline. Those things the school can just keep their nose out of. No wonder there are so many bratty bigoted kids having kids. Because the parents don't want to pick up the slack!

But if junior is failing, it must be the school's fault. If junior is beating the hell out of the his classmates, it must be the school's fault. If junior is now the proud father of an out-of-wedlock child, it must be the school's fault. WHATEVER HAPPENED TO PARENTAL RESPONSIBLITY?!

So now we blame the teachers. We pile more work on top of their bent backs and expect them to perform it with a smile. After all, they get so many spiritual rewards from teaching. Well let me tell you what, spiritual rewards are nice and all, but they don't put money on the table. And don't give me that BS that teachers get the summer off. No, they just don't get paid during the summer. Generally most teachers have to go to seminars, refresher classes, requalification classes, go into school to either clean up from one year or get ready for another. And if they're not doing any of these then they're stuck bagging groceries someplace just to make up for the CRAPPY WAGES THEY GET PAID.

To paraphrase an old saying about farmers: It isn't polite to badmouth teachers when you have to read or write in order criticize them.

[Tansy_Gold]

60. The other profession that is grossly underpaid, dominated by . . . .

. . . . women, and focused on the needs of children is social worker.

Don't EVEN get me started.

(Excellent post, btw, MadHound)

Tansy Gold, whose social worker daughter is married to a teacher

[MadHound]

62. Oh yeah, you've got that right!

I worked with MR/DD people for almost a decade, man did that suck!. It wasn't working with the people, they were great, it was the administration squeezing blood out of a turnip and the crappy pay that got to me. The burn out from stress in any area of social work is quite high for these very reasons. Fortunately(and unfortunately too) MR/DD folk are not under much scrutiny from parents, most are more than happy to pay the money and warehouse their kids. And are VERY suprised when their darlings start showing progress.

So I know where you are. I'm the son of a two teachers and husband to another(though she teaches at a college).

[Ilsa]

143. And nursing, which is also dangerous and dirty work.

It is starting to pay better, but if they tack on the new OT rules, we'll almsot be back where we started.

[SharonAnn]

75. And why vouchers to private schools with no testing?

If we must have testing and performance in the public schools, and parents should get vouchers if the school doesn't perform, then why are they entitled to use that public money to send their kids to a private school that isn't required to have testing or any other accountability?

[lark]

90. Logical

Good answer, SharonAnn - it hits at the heart of their hypocricy.

lark

[screembloodymurder]

65. Oh, I see

parents need incentives to take care of their own children. Well, let's bring back wellfare.

[lark]

89. Pay parents to parent?

How weird! Teachers are supposed to teach, parents to parent. Part of parenting is reinforcing learning on hundreds of different levels, including behavioral, socicietal and book learning.

This is just another part of the BFEE plot to destroy public education in this country. An informed populace is dangerous to their plans to turn the country into a third-world like nation, with them and the other reich-wing rich in control of course.

lark

[RedEarth]

114. "money needs to be put toward parental-incentives"...you must be

kidding. Paying parents to assume responsibility for the child's education......that's just what's needed. Paying people to be responsible parents.......that's really a great idea.

Perhaps a better idea is they shouldn't have children, if they are not going to assume responsibility for them.

[Ellen Forradalom]

115. Piss-poor logic there, my friend.

You've given us a fine example of a false dilemma..

Money toward parental incentives? What on earth do you have in mind? Pay them for being good parents? That is truly a bizarre idea.

Educational system accepts full responsibility for what? If the parents do not make school a priority, then the child will not, either, and there are limited things that a teacher can do to counteract that.

[BenFranklinUSA]

140. Teacher Pay Issue vs. Spending Wisely

If student cannot achieve without parental involvement,
if it is considered a critical element,
then the "cost of education" MUST address parental involvement.

But it doesn't.

Teachers often complain about too much parental involvement, especially when it challenges their "territory".

What teacher's REALLY mean is "teach you brats some discipline, but stay the hell out of teaching everything else."

[screembloodymurder]

64. My wife is an IU teacher.

Her students are mentally/emotionally challenged, but even though their abilities are limited, they are required to take tests designed for students of normal intelligence . My wife is then judged on their performance.

My wife puts up with behavior that would land normal students in jail (death threats, assault, etc.) and she does it on a daily basis. The students parents are, for the most part, non-participating. No private school would take these students, let alone take responsibility for their test scores. But then, the private schools can take the pick of the litter and they don't have to test to get funded.

The GOP has only one educational objective: Destroy the NEA.

[RedEarth]

113. " lack of parental involvement" ........I agree 100%

My wife is also a teacher and the stories she tells about the " lack of parental involvement" is sickening....."well Johnny was too tired to do his homework", "well he lost his assignment", "oh, we went out of town and he didn't have time to do his homework", "oh, that's more homework than he could do".

Too many parents expect teachers not only to teach their children, but also to be a "parent"....make sure their kids do their school work, make sure their child behaves, make sure they get to school on time....etc, etc. Almost without exception, the children that do well in school come from families where the parents are actively involved in their child's education. If they are not, the government, nor those parents, should expect the teachers to be able to make up for that lack of parental involvement.

[roguevalley]

144. Its why I quit at 27 years. This will only encourage cheating.

Teachers in my district get $400.00 to stock a classroom with teacher supplies and ALL things kids need, including teaching materials.

$400.00.

They average 28 kids a room around here.

These people don't know crap. It isn't the teachers, by and large. Its the society that pays a baseball player $100,000,000.00 and a teacher $28,000.

There are a lot of fixable things in education but linking teachers to kids isn't one of them. How am I supposed to be responsible for a kid who never performed, who has parents who can't/don't care, might be fetal alcohol impaired, living in foster care, have legitimate learning problems, is one of 28-34 kids in an average classroom each year for six or seven years before they get to me, have an ineffectual teacher or two in that time, have an administrator in the building and in the Central Office that is stupid/clueless/psychotic,
is poor and disaffected, has problems in their lives that drain their attention, etc. etc. etc.

Do I have to be held accountable if they don't learn when this -any and sometimes all of it- is there too?

No way in hell. Count me out. Count out most the veterans I know and too bad. This will become an even more nowhere job than it is now.

RV, not bitter, just disappointed and tired.

[Enraged_Ape]

3. Then they will cheat and game the system like they are doing now...

in Texas, from whence this horseshit industry of testing our children to death came.

"The Texas Miracle" is a fraud, like anything else associated with the Bush family. It's time we went back to teaching kids instead of testing them.

[lastliberalintexas]

48. Ding! We have a winner folks!

There are a number of school districts who have either been under investigation or who currently are for cheating on the TAKS test, fudging graduation rates, etc. here in Texas. One of which is Houston ISD, formerly run by... Secretary Paige!

Texas schools have been "graded" based on crappy and easily manipulated data that allows the TEA to designate them as exemplary, recognized, failing, etc. And schools have found many, many, many creative ways around these requirements.

The ultimate goal is, of course, to deprive the public school system of any shred of credibility so that voters start supporting vouchers. Then we can have our own little Taliban type schools, run by the religious right rather than Islamic fundamentalists. And corporate cronies who provide services to these schools win too (of course).

[trogdor]

93. Testing, as it is now, is a sham.

You have states like New York, which take it seriously, and states like Texas which do not. There needs to be a national standard, with testing as nearly airtight as they can possibly be made. Having 50 different state standards and saying, "one size doesn't fit all," to justify it means no real standards at all. For what do we even have an Education department?

I'm all for testing, if it's done right.

[MercutioATC]

4. Great idea! Now apply the same rules to parents and schools (supplies)

Teachers aren't the problem...parents and resources are. Sure, you'll encounter your occasional teacher who doesn't belong in the field, but most are intelligent people working for below-average wages to educate our children. Their biggest obstacles are inadequate funding and parents who don't parent.

[BenFranklinUSA]

44. Parents Who Parent Well Choose Home Schooling

...given they have the time and resources.

Want to get scores up? Want parent involvement?
Mandate low-scorers go home and hold the parents liable.

:-S

[Tansy_Gold]

53. Works fine if the parents don't have to work.

Home schooling is a privilege of the wealthy; it is simply not available to the un- and under-educated working and laborer classes.

I suppose you also think that if parents want their kids to get a good education they should send them to private schools, with or without vouchers.

Tansy Gold, who is biting her fingers to keep from calling names.

[Sperk]

5. * past teachers are breathing a sigh of relief!

CEO's bankrupt companies-get huge bonuses
Teachers' students test poorly-get pay cut
Sounds reasonable to me. :wtf:

[Pax Argent]

17. The solution is simple

The teachers learn to game the numbers like corporate America does, or they focus on their "core competencies" to the exclusion of everything else like music and science to achieve their goal.

Corporate mentality does not belong in the classroom.

[cosmik debris]

88. NO FAIR

That's not fair. You stole the answers. That is exactly the way Texas created its "Miracle"

[Gysgt213]

6. What a neat way to figure out to keep teacher salaries down

So the kids with the most needs won't have any teachers teaching them because they will always have lower test scores.

[lark]

91. serfs

What a great way to get an under-class of poorly paid workers for the large corporations. I'm sure they see this as a major bonus of destroying the NEA - get rid of a source of funding for common sense and create a nation of serfs.

lark

[Tansy_Gold]

96. There is another DU thread on neo-conservatism vs. feudalism

which basically explores this same idea.

If I can find it, I'll repost the url here.

edited to post URL

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=1016306

[Muddleoftheroad]

7. Face it

In many ways, public education is rapidly spiraling into a failure. I doubt America will drop the concept altogether, but it has fading support. This is further designed to punish public education.

[Cheswick2.0]

45. please provide proof

Please provide proof that public education is failing.

[Muddleoftheroad]

56. Three words

District of Columbia.

Other words:

Urban school districts, home schooling, falling test scores, falling education rankings (compared to other industrialized nations), etc.

[Tansy_Gold]

81. regarding home schooling

This is a personal rant based on personal experience with people who home school their children. it is not meant as a report on a scientific study.

Most of the parents I know who homeschool their kids do so for religious reasons, not because they think the public schools are failing in their objective of educating. These parents place a very high value on a traditional to fundamentalist christian education platform. They are afraid that if their children associate with non-traditional christians and/or are exposed to non-fundamentalist secular ideas (acceptance of homosexuality, evolution, women in non-traditional roles, etc.) that they will be corrupted and go to hell in a very literal way.

These parents would be delighted to send their children to "public" schools if "public" schools returned to a McGuffey's Eclectic Readers curriculum.

Virtually all of the parents I know who homeschool their children are anti-immigrant. When I lived in Indiana in the 1970s and early 80s, our small rural community had a comparatively large population of middle eastern and south Asian (Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi) engineering students. Though most of them were young single males, some were married and had children. At least two women I knew there pulled their children out of the public schools and homeschooled them because they were afraid of "contamination" from these children, some of whom were "mixed race," i.e. father was foreign student while mother was "white" American. Here in Arizona, many of the women I know who homeschool their children do so because they are afraid they will start speaking Spanish and not be able to get good jobs. I'm sure they do not read the classified ads that frequently include "Bilingual Spanish/English required."

The economics of home schooling require that at least one of the parents not be gainfully employed outside the home during normal school hours. Most working-, laborer-, and lower-unemployed-class parents don't have either the education necessary to homeschool or the facilities. This means that homeschooling is usually an alternative to enrollment in a "good" school, rather than enrollment in a "failing" one. Often the cost of homeschooling is beyond the means of lower income families.

Vouchers, of course, are not the solution. Many of the private schools won't take any students who might harm their reputation, and many private/charter schools are exempt from performance testing. (I believe this is not the case in Arizona, where they are at least minimally accountable, but after some of the outrageous scandals related to a few of the charters here, one wonders. . . . Just FYI, the Stanford 9 scores for 9th grade at the charter Estrella High School in Avondale, Arizona, in Reading, Language, and Math for 2002 were respectively 20, 14, and 22.)

A $1500 or even $2500 voucher doesn't go far toward the tuition to a private school that may exceed $10,000 a year, not to mention the "extras" the family is expected to provide. And we won't even go into the social stresses that would be applied to a child from a low-income family who attends a school where 90% of the students come from families in the upper 1% of the income scale.

The problem of disparate education is not to be solved with single-focus solutions -- vouchers, home-schooling, testing. We have to look at the whole system of inequality, from family income to land ownership to corporate control and on and on and on, because more often than not, the single-focus solutions actually help the haves do better against the have-nots, and that's not what we're trying to do, is it? I mean, unless we're repukes, right?

[DesignGirl]

112. Home Schooling

I home school my two sons after dealing with the public school system here in Virginia. We had what was supposed to be a good school for my son it was a nightmare. Virginia started testing several years before the new testing laws and is one of the toughest tests.
We and many of the people I know do this because we want our children to grow with an interest in the world abound them and other people. They get an education from many "teachers" in their lives and not just what some system says they need to know.
We are not that religious. I left a good (financially) job and now work for myself so I can adjust to any schedule we need and help with the finances and because I enjoy what I do. We have made many changes in our life style to make this happen but it has been worth it.

Children need many thing to learn. They each are different people and should be around involved in many different things so they can learn by seeing, doing, moving, touching, speaking, and doing whatever they need to help them become happy productive citizens.

Promoting only testing does nothing for real education. It only creates mindless "sheep" that can repeat meaningless facts and fill in small circles and feel miserable and stressed out if they can't conform.

[Fish-Slapping_Dance]

141. I'm with you, DesignGirl

We home-school our children, too, in large measure because we want our children to have a broader world-view than they will get in the straight-jacked public schools here. We have a small support network of like-minded liberals, who approve of higher millages to pay for public education, but who want even more for our children. I had to wrestle with the fact that taking my children out of the public schools would decrease their funding somewhat (their daily average attendance funding from the state), but it was such a small amount that we felt comfortable with our decision considering what our children would gain.

And also, not to put too fine a point on it, because some of the schools here are flat unsafe.

Don't catagorize all home-schoolers as right-wing fundies. We're not.

[cosmicdot]

8. everyone gets an A ... Louis Gertsner established this commission

... nothing like having corporate america and one of its CEOs to head up its own commission on Education ... how many classrooms across America did they visit ... how many teachers did they conference? where did the funding come from for this 'independent' citizen commission? what did Barbara Bush do, and how much did she get paid for it?






The Teaching Commission © 2003 Reinventing America's Schools, Inc. established by Louis V. Gerstner, Jr., former Chairman and CEO of IBM, announced the appointment of three new members. Following the first meeting of The Teaching Commission on May 21st, Mr. Gerstner said that he was “delighted” to welcome John Doerr, Frank Keating and Scott Painter. “They are excellent additions to The Teaching Commission, and I look forward to working with each of them and the other distinguished members of this group,” added Mr. Gerstner.

John Doerr is the co-founder of the NewSchools Venture Fund, which seeks to improve public education by supporting a growing community of education entrepreneurs. Mr. Doerr is also a partner at Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, a venture capital firm.

Frank Keating is the former Governor of Oklahoma and the President and CEO of the American Council of Life Insurers. Governor Keating was the second governor in Oklahoma’s history to be elected to two consecutive terms. As Governor from 1994 through 2002, he was responsible for the passage of major education reform efforts, including Right-to-Work, school choice, and a stronger high school core curriculum.

Scott Painter is a high school chemistry and physics teacher at South Atlanta High School in Atlanta, Georgia. He started teaching as a participant in Teach for America and was recently selected as the Atlanta Public Schools High School Teacher of the Year. Mr. Painter has a Bachelor’s Degree in Chemical Engineering from the University of Texas at Austin where he was the President of the American Institute of Chemical Engineers.

In January, Mr. Gerstner launched The Teaching Commission – a cross section of national leaders from business, education and government – to closely examine all aspects of teacher quality, including recruitment, retention, training, preparation, compensation and evaluation.

“The goal of The Teaching Commission is to dramatically improve student performance and in order to do so, we must focus on the most important element of education and that is teaching,” said Richard Riley, former Secretary of Education and a member of The Commission.

Members of The Teaching Commission are:

• Arlene Ackerman, Superintendent, San Francisco Unified School District

• Roy E. Barnes, former Governor, Georgia

• Barbara Bush

• Kenneth I. Chenault, Chairman and CEO, American Express Company


• Richard I. Beattie, Chairman, Simpson, Thacher & Bartlett

• Philip M. Condit, Chairman and CEO, The Boeing Company

• John Doerr, Partner, Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers

• Sandra Feldman, President, American Federation of Teachers

• Matthew Goldstein, Chancellor, The City University of New York

• Vartan Gregorian, President, The Carnegie Corporation

• Beverly Hall, Superintendent, Atlanta Public Schools

• James B. Hunt Jr., former Governor, North Carolina

• Frank Keating, former Governor, Oklahoma

• Richard Krasno, Executive Director, The William R. Kenan, Jr. Charitable Trust

• Ellen Condliffe Lagemann, Dean, The Harvard Graduate School of Education

• W. James McNerney Jr., Chairman and CEO, 3M

• Scott Painter, Teacher, Atlanta Public Schools

• Richard W. Riley, former US Secretary of Education, former Governor, South Carolina

http://www.theteachingcommission.org/press/2003_06_02_01.html

Having taught history/social studies for 6 years in the 70s ... I doubt if Mr. Gertsner or his "cross-section' commission care about Education in America. I guess Bush-Cheney will wave this 'report' in the air?

[SharonAnn]

76. Gerstner, who is outsourcings tens of thousands of professional

jobs to India. Guess he won't be needing any educated workers in the United States any longer and if he does, he can transfer in one of his people in India on an L1 visa.

[Pikku]

125. Wow, look at all those "experts"

One of them even may even meet the NCLB "highly qualified" requirement for classroom teachers. (Hint: it's the one teacher on the panel.)

This sort of reminds me of the "expert reading panel" that George Putsch liked so much. It had a teacher on it too.

http://www.pdkintl.org/kappan/k0201yat.htm

Seems like all you need to be an "educational expert" is to have attended a school at some point in your life. Oh yeah, and to be a campaign contributor.

[amber dog democrat]

9. That is like paying engineers to meet deadlines

What a clever idea.
So its all about test scores and grades?
This has All Hope Abandon written all over it.

[papau]

10. who teaches the slower to catch on kids?

in IBM's deadline bonus situation, if the deadline is not realistically possible, the employees get mad 'cause they get nothing yet are expected to do 60 hour weeks.

[amber dog democrat]

12. That is why I left Apple.

It ALL looks good on paper.

[callous taoboy]

35. Right!

My colleague down the hall teaches gifted and talented kids, I have predominately ESL kids. Guess which group performs better on the test?

[Le Taz Hot]

11. So, how many millions

did we spend on this "study" in which once again, the teachers are blamed?

It couldn't POSSIBLY be the fact that only about 30% textbook content covers state standards and state standardized test, could it? Nahhhh. Provided, of course, that the state even has standards or adequate ones.

We can't attract top student teachers possibly because the starting salary for most teachers is anything but competititve and that most graduates can make two to three times more in the private sector for 5-7 years of higher education they'll be paying for for the next 10-20 years.

The purpose of this whole thing -- from the No Child Left Behind mandate to demonizing the NEA to slamming teachers is clear and has been from the start -- vouchers -- to throw a bone to the fundies(you think they'll be funding Muslim schools?).

Be ready for the "Bob Jones Elementary School" coming to a town near you. Your tax dollars at work. :puke:

[yellowcanine]

22. How About the Jerry Falwell All Day Kindergarten

Phonics, arithmetic, and Bible verse memorization drills all day long for your 5-year-old.

[Whoa_Nelly]

13. So those who teach Special Education students

will receive even less pay, not to mention getting less and less funding. Won't be long before all special needs children are left behind.

[yellowcanine]

20. And then there is the "Texas Plan" for improving graduation rates.

A painless way to raise graduation rates is to cook the books and mark all of the dropouts as "transfers". Magically the graduation rates shoot up to 98% or so. This is how the current Education Secretary had so much success at "improving" the Houston schools.

[0007]

30. Ron Paige was responsible for cooking the Texas books

Guess where Mr. Paige is now. He was rewarded by junior and was made Secretary of Education.

Is this joke or what?
Then their are those folks that believe that there are bad teachers as well as good teachers. If one looks hard enough it would be found that for every good teacher you may find a bad one! Not true. Maybe around a ratio of ten to one. Bad doesn't stay around too long in most school systems. But this a fine excuse for one to find fault with the teachers instead of looking at the virtues of most parents. The problem is the problem children going into the world to be a problem for society. And those problem children can usually be identified before ever leaving the school system.

Pure hog wash by the ignorant who believe a few bad teachers are responsible by the whole good of the educational system.

[latebloomer]

14. Screw creativity!

Get rid of teachers who think outside the box and inspire their students! It's all about test scores, and drilling, drilling, drilling!

That's how we raise good little cogs to grow up and be managers at Mickey D's.

[dustypen]

16. give me 2 big macs please

i'm trying to put on weight so I can turnaound and sue them for making me fat. Then when I get all that money I wont have to work and wont need an eduction..

the perfect plan

[Cassandra]

25. I guess Repukes should stop...

giving our tax money to support MacDonald's and other large corporations.

[progressiverealist]

15. gee do you think this will make teachers "teach to the test?"

Naaaahhhhh.... not in Dubya's America.

[yellowcanine]

18. Fad solutions from non-educators

Like phonics and all-day kindergarten, this is another fad solution being pushed by people who have never stood in front of a classroom. If the policy makers really want to know how to make schools better (not always the same thing as higher test scores - test scores are only part of it) they need to start asking the troops in the trenches - the teachers and then give them the tools to do the job. Yes better pay is part of it, but by no means is it all of it. Smaller classes, fewer mindless administrative tasks, MORE RESPECT AND RECOGNITION, more support from administration, opportunities for professional advancement, more academic freedom, less micromanagement by school administrators and school boards, etc. Society has been beating up on teachers for the past thirty years and then they wonder why the good students don't want to go into teaching and why the good teachers don't stay. When I was in college (long ago), lots of people wanted to go into teaching. Teaching jobs were hard to get, particularly in the humanities. This meant only good students got teaching jobs. Most of my classmates, including myself, who started out in teaching are now doing something else.

[Muddleoftheroad]

26. I see both sides of this

It's not exactly like the education establishment is kicking butt with their solutions either.

Teachers are caught in the middle. Some are outstanding and some just show up.

[Chovexani]

32. Why on earth do you think there are teachers who "just show up?"

Why on earth do you think there are teachers who "just show up?" Hell, maybe they used to care at first, and then reality hit them: crappy pay, no kind of respect from anyone, no support from the administration, abuse and apathy from the parents, a tiny room packed to the rafters with bratty kids, no supplies, outdated books (and there's never enough to go around), bureaucrats constantly breathing down their necks who institute draconian "look good" measures that more often than not stifle their ability to do their job, etc. etc. FFS, teachers are human beings not saints. To expect anyone to put up with the kind of horseshit the average teacher has to on a daily basis and then turn out 100 Rhodes scholars isn't just stupid it's downright unfair.

Look, I agree with you that the education establishment isn't perfect, but don't shit on teachers. My best friend is a high school English teacher in the Bronx. He teaches four periods, all of which have over 30 kids. To give you an idea of what it's like there, he actually got "blessed" by the Latin Kings (a kid he tutored had a brother who was a leader or something). He has to pay out of pocket for supplies and books. The parents don't give a crap--on Parent Teacher night he sets up a Playstation 2 and games all night cause no one ever shows up. These same parents won't hesitate to come in and scream at him if he dares suggest Sweet Little Johnny is less than a perfect angel. The kids think Harry Potter is too hard (these are HS kids). He gets told point blank by administrators to pass sports players even if they're the dumbest ones in the class (and they usually are, at least in his classes). Until recently there was a rule that classified yelling as "corporal punishment". The thing is, he's got tenure, so he's pretty much stuck there. Oh and you want to know what else? The passing rate has plummeted in the last few years. So what are the bureaucrats thinking of doing to fix it? Lowering the passing grade from 65 to 55. Genius, ne? :eyes: Almost every other day one of the daily rags we call newspapers in this town has some kind of story bashing teachers. Sometimes I think mobsters get more respect.

Every weekend I go up there and run a D&D game for him and his partner. One time on a snack run to the supermarket this lady overheard us talking about how crappy he had it and she tore into him saying it was all his fault that kids aren't learning, etc. A total stranger! But my friend says this is not an uncommon thing and people often accost him in the street for no reason just because he's a teacher. "Why don't you do X, Y, or Z?" they demand. He responds as he always does, that either a) he's tried it and no kids/parents showed up or took advantage b) he can't because of some byzantine Board of Ed rule c) it costs money that he doesn't have and the administration won't support him on it. So now he just puts his Do Nows and the homework on the board, collects his miniscule paycheck, and tries to get home to his partner in one piece (which really is an accomplishment). He's like a shell-shocked Vietnam vet when he gets home.

Before you dog teachers I seriously suggest you get to know one. Sure there are lazy people in every profession but probably less than 5% of teachers are lazy. The really dedicated teachers should be commended but don't dog the ones who "just show up" because more often than not they didn't always used to be that way, the system just broke their spirit. They need our support not our condemnation.

--C

[0007]

50. Thank you in answering Muddles post in a most elegant manner

I tried in my post #30 above. But your diatribe was the best, and I indeed appreciated it.

I've yet to heard an outcry over Ron Paige, and this does bother me.

[Muddleoftheroad]

57. You and I don't have much disagreement

I think everybody from parents to educators (the gang in suits) to politicians to taxpayers to teachers shares the responsibility.

I have known great teachers (my high school history teacher still is remembered as the best) and I have known rotten ones. Most, I imagine, fall somewhere in between.

But that is, if you pardon the pun, academic at this point. In much of the U.S. public education is a travesty. Children can't and won't be educated (you make the same point) and parents are also uninvolved. Yet we throw great gobs of money at the problem and it only gets worse.

I can't begin to see how to fix it, but I know throwing money at the problem is not an effective answer.

[progressivejazz]

118. Why is it that spending money on education

is called "throwing money at the problem", when spending money on other state activities, like the police force and fire department is called "investing"?

[Muddleoftheroad]

119. Not what I would call it

Police and firefighters stop problems after it is too late in many cases. For instance, had a zoning office handled things better or a state inspector checked for a sprinkler system, then the fire might have never gotten out of control.

[jmowreader]

138. Phonics actually works

The "Hooked on Phonics" bullshit doesn't work. But the old-fashioned phonics, if you teach it as a separate class in conjunction with a reading class, works fine.

When my brother and sisters went to school, they had the phonics book and the phonics-based reading book, and they all learned to read very well. (I don't count, because I was reading at 5th grade level by the time I started the first grade. Pissed the teachers off, I'm here to tell ya.)

My mother was a small-town librarian for probably 20 years. After the school got out of phonics and into the look-and-say method of reading instruction, she had kids come in to check out books. And invariably, there were words they didn't know in the books.

"Mrs. Mowreader, what's this word?"
'You don't know that word?'
"No, we haven't had that word yet."
'Well, just sound it out.'
"I don't know how to do that."

That happened more times than I want to think about.

The moral of this story is that nothing works in a vacuum.

[alcuno]

19. I just got back the benchmark tests for my math classes.

And I am NOT HAPPY about some of the questions my students missed. For example, this was a multiple-choice test WITH CALCULATORS and 1/5 of a class MISSED this question.

x - 38 = 84


How could they get 112 and not 122 you ask? Obviously they didn't bother to use the calculator or add on paper. The students who picked 112 did so because they looked at the question, found it easy, did it in their heads (quite carelessly) and came up with the wrong answer.

My pay gets determined by the actions of 11 year olds?

[callous taoboy]

24. I am scoring my math benchmarks now

and it is not pretty and we've worked our butts off! The problem is we are using a "one size fits all" test when kids are hardly equal in ability. Also, not surprisingly, my student whose school attendance is dependent on her mom's work schedule (i.e. she misses at least once, sometimes twice a week) did very poorly on the benchmark. So under this plan my pay would be based on this child's mom's work schedule. Makes about as much sense as, say, the war in Iraq, tax cuts for the rich, gutting environmental regulations, being anti-union. I was waiting for these idiots to come up with a test score-teacher pay tie in. There are dark forces in this country who claim to be pro-public ed who are conspiring to make public ed a thing of the past. The Mepublicans want "Leave it to Beaver," but mostly I see Rosanne's kids. (No offense to Rosanne).

Also, what about kids with limited english proficiency? We have a half-assed program to get them up to speed in english, but yet they come to regular ed. with limited english and since they were rushed through and exited from the LEP program they are expected to take and pass the test with the same level of proficiency as their native english-speaking peers. Are you a brain surgeon? Don't need to be to see that this is more BOGUS garbage from the son of a man who was blown away by grocery store scanning technology. Totally out of touch with reality.

This will never fly. They tried it in our district once years ago and it was shut down quickly once cooler heads prevailed.

[screembloodymurder]

66. Maybe if * would kick the illegal aliens out

we could concentrate on the tests instead of wasting time teaching English.

[Tansy_Gold]

69. There are fourth-generation native-born "Americans" in my town

. . . .. who do not speak English.

As generatiobns of farm laborers, they were never expected to get an education, so they were never encouraged to learn English. It was okay to speak their native tongue, so long as the bosses spoke enough to get them to work.

Now all of a sudden, the farm jobs are disappearing and the kids who never had to learn English before are being told they have to and at the same time they're being denied the tools to do so.

But that's just the "legals."

What do you propose we do with the "illegals" (goddess, but I loathe that word) who are seven and eight and nine years old? Send them out into the fields to pick cotton? Or just let 'em live on the street, and pick through the trash to keep themselves alive?

And why is it almost always the Spanish-speaking "illegals" who are held up to scrutiny?

Do you have any idea how difficult it is to learn another language? Have you ever tried?

Sorry. I'm angry. I'm really angry.

And no, I don't have a personal stake in this. My family has been in this country "legally" for about umpteen generations, but many of them came at a time when there was no INS, no "documentation."

I'm getting angrier. Maybe too angry.

[Tansy_Gold]

28. "My pay gets determined by the actions of 11 year olds?"

That brilliant statement alone ought to be enough to toss this absolutely ludicrous suggestion right down the toilet, where it belongs with all the rest of the shit coming from the * regime.

For the past three or four years, our local newspaper here in the far west suburbs of Phoenix (West Valley View) has published the standardized test scores of all the schools in the area. I've saved those reports just out of my own morbid curiosity and to prove a point I've been trying to make for the past twenty years or more: no matter what bizarre legislation you pass regarding test results, nothing changes the fact that schools that have a higher population of students from lower income homes will have lower average test scores. Period.

Let's look at some representative scores from 2002, as published in The View 6 August 2003:

Looking just at eighth grade Reading, Language, and Math from the Stanford 9 Test (in percentiles):

Arlington Elementary 47 35 70
Avondale Middle 40 35 40
Buckeye Elementary 46 30 44
Canyon Breeze Elementary 60 58 72
Copper King Elementary 45 36 36
Desert Horizon Elementary 44 41 40
Desert Mirage Elementary 53 55 54
Estrella Elementary 71 69 71
Garden Lakes Elementary 60 64 62
Liberty Elementary 53 47 61
Palo Verde Elementary 47 49 56
Pendergast Elementary 53 46 48
Porfirio H. Gonzales Elementary
49 51 57
Rainbow Valley Elementary 49 46 59
Ruth Fisher Elementary 42 34 50
Santa Maria Middle 38 32 31
Sheely Farms Elementary 42 44 59
Sonoran Sky Elementary 59 64 58
Underdown Junior High 38 29 33
Union Elementary 19 12 21
Villa de Paz Elementary 47 42 41
Western Sky Middle 64 67 68
Westwind Elementary 47 45 43

Arizona has instituted some malevolent monster called the AIMS test, which is one of those deals you take four or five times during 13 years of school and if you don't pass it, you don't graduate from high school. It's been more or less rescinded several times, because half the teachers can't pass it. But the importance of the AIMS test has been that it has focused attention on other standardized test scores and forced schools to work at improving those test scores or be labeled "failing."

So we end up with aberrations like "Palo Verde Elementary second-graders improved tremendously, especially in language (54 to 76) and math (64 to 82)." (Quoted from the hard copy of the paper which is sitting beside me.) Palo Verde is a very small rural school. It might graduate 25 eighth graders a year. One teacher focusing on one section of the test can easily raise those scores dramatically for a single year -- but are the kids learning anything? What happens to that same cohort of students when they go on to the next grade? Do they maintain that 82 percentile when they hit multiplication and long division? (Palo Verde also has a mix of very well-to-do farm owner familes and very poor farm worker families. In a small testing population, even a few high scorers can skew the test results, if the lower end scores are significantly improved through intensive "teaching to the test." The same demographic pattern is true of Arlington, and to a lesser extent, Liberty and Ruth Fisher.)

But what about the high scoring schools, Canyon Breeze, Desert Mirage, Estrella Elementary, Garden Lakes, Sonoran Sky, and Western Sky? They're all in new, upscale housing developments. the schools themselves are new, bright, contemporary, built with technology in mind.

Union Elementary and Underdown Junior High are in older, working- and laborer-class communities, with high percentages of Hispanic students for whom English may not be a first language and may not be spoken at all at home.

Often, as new housing developments are built in this predominantly rural area, the new homeowners DEMAND new schools rather than send their children even temporarily to schools that are high-percentage minority. Three or four years ago, when the high school in the Estrella Mountain Ranch development was being planned, there were articles in the paper in which the families in Estrella were assured that their children would NOT be bussed to Buckeye Union High School. The Estrella school would be state of the art, and would benefit from a several million dollar grant from the state's funds -- the children at Buckeye Union High School would have to make do with their leaky roofs and antiquated air conditioning and a water system that conked out every time the fire department flushed a hydrant anywhere in town. After all, rich kids can't learn under conditions like that --- and poor kids don't need to??????

It's too early in the morning for me to rant much more. I have work to do.

But if there is some hope on the horizon ---- Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano has put education as a top priority for at least our state in the coming years. And as silly and sappy as it may seem, her program to give each first grader a book of her or his own illustrates how truly desperate and disparate our system has become.

Oh, yeah, let's go to the moon. Let's go to Mars. The poor folks will still be here toiling, and believing none of it.

bitter and angry,

I remain,

Tansy Gold

[callous taoboy]

33. Excellent post, Tansy:

Same thing happens here in Austin when test scores come out: It becomes painfully clear that we have a test of demographics.

I honestly think that there is probably a tie-in between bushco getting campaign money from standardized testing concerns.

[Tansy_Gold]

37. A tie-in tied with blood

I believe one of the * brothers is involved with one of those testing companies. Or a company that teaches the tests. Or scores them. Or something.

Anyway, it's just another example of aristocratic monarchical control of everything in the Empire.

[SharonAnn]

80. Yep, Neil Bush has a compan (Ignite) that prepares kids for the test

or so he says. Financed by Other People's Money (a good chunk of it is Saudi money) and purchased by Florida(? can that be true?) to prepare those kids for the state mandated tests.

Not sure if it's been purchase by Florida, but I saw that they were planning to buy it some time ago.

[priller]

21. Wow, what massive stupidity

The Houston "Texas Miracle" report that came showed that when the school board offered to pay principals to lower dropout rates, they simply "cooked the books" to get better results. You start paying teachers based on the kids' grades, every student will "miraculously" start getting A's.

Idiots.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

27. this will spark a wave of teachers altering childrens answers and cheating

teachers will change answers for higher pay....it happens already

[callous taoboy]

38. Cheating?

The establishment is already so paranoid about teachers altering the answers that it is a total lock down around here on test day. Also, we are no longer able to check through the tests to make sure the kids bubbled in all of the answers. If it isn't bubbled it is counted wrong. Do I earn x% less next year because I had too many unbubbled answers? INSANITY!!!

[DulceDecorum]

29. Special needs kids' teachers

will be paid in peanut shells?

How come the CEOs get to milk the company regardless of performance?
How come the accountants get a bonus to spin the books?
How come the pResident --- scratch that.

[screembloodymurder]

67. Bush should get paid based on WMD found

zero.

[DrWeird]

31. A racist suggestion.

If teacher's get paid on the test scores of the class, there'll be even more incentive for the teachers to ship "low performing" kids off to the special ed class. For those not familiar with the business, far more kids get recommended by their teacher for special ed than meet the qualifications. Most often these are black children that were assumed to be trouble making simpletons by their racist teachers. This has been shown by several scientific studies and is a much bigger problem than most people realize.

As anecdotal evidence, my fiancee was formerly a special education teacher and reviewed many cases where teachers tried to send their students to special ed and did not meet the qualifications, a disproportionate number were black and hispanic. Unfortunately the other special education teacher in the school, who happened to be white and was known to utter racist sentiment, admitted them into her class, where their education more than likely stagnated.

[booksenkatz]

34. The parents

As a daughter/sister/sister-in-law of excellent public education teachers, I can tell you that an excellent teacher is only part of the equation. The teacher has zero control over what the child is receiving (or not) at home. Therefore, here is my recommendation: base the parents' home tax assessment on the performance of their children in school. That will get them off their butts and suddenly VERY interested in supporting Johnny in every way, and making sure his school days are very successful indeed!

Why is it that every damned recommendation that comes down the pike for improving public education is an idea that REMOVES financing, when the schools are desperate and teachers are paying for materials out of their own pockets and the cafeterias are feeding our children swill and the administrators have to put Coke machines in the halls to get a few more dollars for their schools?

The one idea that seems to work time after time is the idea of smaller class sizes. Less noise, more attention, more focus, more accountability on the student's part... oh, wait, that would cost money and we're trying to think of ways to reduce funding, aren't we?

[Tansy_Gold]

41. Taxing parents on their children's performance is illogical

The students who perform best generally come from more comfortable income families, i.e. those who own their own home, have cable tv and a couple of computers, lots of books, etc. On average, using your suggestion, these people would pay lower taxes.

The students who perform worst generally come from less economically advantaged families. Are you suggesting that we RAISE their taxes to punish them for not owning their home, not having a computer or six, not being able to furnish their kids with $200 calculators to do their math homework? And since many of these people don't own a home to raise the taxes on, what alternative do you propose? Throw them in jail?

Sorry if I sound harsh, but I think yours is a poorly thought out proposal.

Tansy Gold

[booksenkatz]

42. It really was just a joke

I didn't mean for anyone to analyze it, LOL! I just wish there were a way to kick parents in the ass, maybe if we held THEM accountable in some way, it would make a difference. At any rate, I must say that taxing parents on their child's performance is illogical in reality, just as basing a teacher's salary on same is illogical.

[Tansy_Gold]

47. Many parents do try to be engaged

But if you examine the kind of families many poor-performing students come from, it's impossible to make the case that the parents are voluntarily disengaged.

If a child comes from a home with parents who work two or three or more jobs and still can't make ends meet, do we blame the parents for not being interested in their child's education?

If a child comes from a home with parents who have little education themselves and CAN'T help with homework, do we blame them?

If a child comes from a home where there are no books to read because no one can afford them and work is more important because it's the only way to put food on the table, do we blame the parents?

I have no problems with the phrase "class warfare." The rich have been waging war on the poor and working classes for generations. And now they're trying to make us declare war on ourselves.

Just as good schools need good funding, so do good families. If children can't learn in leaky, drafty, too cold/hot, noisy, rickety classrooms, how can we expect them to learn in leaky, drafty, too cold/hot, noisy, rickety, rat-and-roach-infested homes?

Tansy Gold

[booksenkatz]

58. Hear, hear, Tansy Gold

I can't argue with any of that... I'm from the wing of the Democratic Party that believes in pouring money into schools and families to help people to help themselves! I'm not ashamed of it, either. I do believe government can work to make a positive change in people's lives. I'm tired of good ideas failing because Repubs withhold the funding, then they point to the failed idea and say, SEE, BIG GOVERNMENT DOESN'T WORK! Can you imagine what would happen if schools and programs i.e. Head Start and bookmobiles and libraries and HUD and Habitat for Humanity etc. etc. etc. had more money than they knew what to do with? If we had health care for everyone? If children and their families had the basic tools they needed to build a real life for themselves? I'm always wishing for Utopia, I suppose, but my gosh, we've never given these programs a real chance to work. Americans have so many riches at our disposal, we should have the most enlightened society on earth, but we continue to squander it.

But as to the parent issue: many of the disengaged parents I have seen come from the wealthier side of the tracks. Perhaps they feel, as the Bush family did, that little Elrod can buy his way through life...? The parents who are the targets of my anger are the ones who HAVE the tools and COULD be participating, but choose not to. Obviously my anger is not directed at those parents who are working 3 jobs just trying to put "food on their family."

[Muddleoftheroad]

70. Take a look at spending

And see that high spending does NOT necessarily transfer into success. I have a link in another post in this thread if you want to read it.

[Tansy_Gold]

77. I think your logic is not as valid as your stats

I won't dispute your stats. But if you say high spending doesn't necessarily mean high scores, are you implying that low spending doesn't necessarily mean low scores, and therefore we ought to cut back on spending in failing schools and see what happens?

I don't think so.

But I would also question -- and I admit I haven't looked at the stats you posted -- any numbers that are taken out of a social context.

A school district may not spend a great deal of money per pupil because it doesn't have to make up for what the parents already provide. A school that has a population requiring lots of remedial education may have higher costs. A school in an unstable neighborhood may have higher security costs. An older school may have to spend more money on maintenance than a new one. Without knowing the exact breakdown of how the funds are spent, I wouldn't automatically equate spending level with student success level or vice versa.

A school in a more affluent district may have plenty of well-educated parents who are available and willing to volunteer as classroom aides or assistant coaches; in a poorer district, those individuals may be at a premium.

I'm not saying these are necessarily (your word) the case in every comparison. But I do believe they can affect the stats of dollars vs success rate as measured by testing or anything else.

And also consider that at least some of the students who come to school each day with a desperate, hopeless attitude generated by the conditions in which they live may be beyond the help of more funding. That's not as likely to be the case in Utah as in D.C. -- although Utah has its share of social problems. As I said in other posts -- the general inequality pervades the educational system, and we shouldn't expect teachers to overcome all those barriers to learning.

At the end of the day, therefore, I don't think reducing funding to poor performing schools is the way to improve them.

[Muddleoftheroad]

82. Spending is only one of many variables

Increasing it does not necessarily do anything. Before you ever get to spending, you have to address the ills that plague the neighborhoods children live in, the families they go home to and even the crime they encounter on the way to and from school.

You can't expect many children to thrive in an environment where their lives are cheap, their homes are fractured and their communities drug ridden.

[durutti]

36. Ridiculous.

Standardized tests are useless in testing actual, real-world knowledge.

[Snow]

51. Bingo! There're a lot of other very good points made by posters

in this thread - but that's the biggie.

[durutti]

39. How to improve schools...

1. Spend more on them altogether, and spend the same amount per student in every district.

2. Pay teachers more.

3. Treat high school more like college. Give teachers control over curricula and such. Make the administration less powerful. Make tenure dependent upon performance.

[Muddleoftheroad]

59. Item One doesn't work

Take a look at this link:

http://www.miedresearchoffice.org/nationalfacts.htm#_U.S._per-pupil_spending_1

It contains per pupil spending by states in two charts -- straight or adjusted for cost of living.

In the first chart, Utah ranks 51st and D.C. third highest in spending -- more than twice as high as Utah. In the chart adjusted for cost of living, Utah moves up to 46th (data wasn't available for all the states) and D.C. is still the 12th highest spending per pupil.

Now, tell me, where would you send your children to school?

As a survivor of the District of Columbia, I know the answer and it isn't D.C.

[tex46]

43. I don't care how many laptops a school has

When it comes down to it, it's the teacher at the head of the class that impacts the student's life. Not the state of the art video equipment. We need teachers to be paid better and we need more of them. When a teacher's salary is competitive with that of other career choices then the teaching profession will become competitive. In Texas, 90% of the time a woman teaches to supplement her husband's income and because she has relatively similar hours as her kids who are in school. There's nothing wrong with this, but it does little to bring fresh, new, creative learning solutions to the classroom.

We need more teachers for Art, Music, Languages, Vocational and yes, even athletics.

[maxrandb]

46. Worst Republican Myth ever invented was the "Failing Public Schools"

Although not perfect, we happen to have here in America, the greatest public education program in the world. The neo-con propaganda machine has churned out the myth of the "failed public education system", and they have played Goebbels playbook to the letter. "Tell a lie often enough and it becomes the truth".

I have two children in the public school system, and I cringe when they ask me for help with their homework. My one daughters Freshman Biology class is so in-depth and so difficult that I have to break out my old college notes to help. If our schools are so lousy, then why do we have the greatest standard of living in the world? Why do we lead the world in innovation and technological advancement? I'll tell you why, it's because our schools are NOT FAILING. The Reich wing will pull out an egregious example to make the argument that "ALL schools are like this", or "my god, those godless public schools are destroying our children". If only we had them recite prayer in public schools every child would get an "A" and have involved parents.

No one ever stops to ask, "why do the neo-cons do this"? Could it have something to do with the fact that the vast majority of teachers support Democratic principles and candidates? If the neo-cons are not vindictive, then maybe someone could tell me why Fresno gets $7 million for homeland security, but Oakland gets squat. Couldn't be because Fresno overwhelmingly elects "wing-nuts" while the people in Oakland are heathens.

All you need to know about education in this country as far as I am concerned is this:
1. My brother got a degree in education. He makes 3 times as much money as a butcher. He ends up cutting meat for a local grocery store chain. When we pay more money to the man who cuts our steaks, than the man who teaches our children, I'm sorry, but that is just SICK!
2. Let Wal-Mart, or Sears, or McDonalds, or any other business operate without a trained, qualified workforce. Close the public schools and listen to Wal-Mart howl about not being to field qualified workers.

This is long and I'm pissed so I apologize to Mr. Ryan, who tried his best to teach me English and Spelling. Thanks dude!

We need to stamp out this Repuke myth everywhere we hear it. Truth is, we have a fantastic public education system.

[Tansy_Gold]

49. GREAT POST!!!!

This oughta go on the front page of DU!

[Kool Kitty]

72. Hell, it ought to go on the front page of the NYTimes!

[ElsewheresDaughter]

68. your post is DEAD ON!!!...nt

[Muddleoftheroad]

71. Where are these successful public schools?

In wealthy areas, that where. There, the parents both work, but can afford to take time off to attend parent-teacher conferences. There the standard of living is so high that when the school needs something, the school gets it even if parents have to pay for it themselves.

Then there is the rest of the world.

I lived in that other world. That's where minorities are supposed to live I guess. The blacks, the Hispanices, the Asians, the new immigrants, we get the horrendous education system. Try two of the most horrible urban school districts in the U.S. -- Baltimore and D.C. Boy I thought Charm City was bad, but it was great compared to D.C. Not sure, but last I heard, D.C. still didn't even know how many employees it had, after trying for three years to figure out that little factoid.

D.C. spends more per pupil than all but two states in the U.S., yet the schools are crime-infested, drug-infested and sure as hell NOT learning-infested.

But the lovely suburban districts nearby are doing quite well thank you.

America has a high quality of life because we take the best people from around the world. The quality of our education system used to be great. Now it varies from area to area and from success to epic failure.

[maxrandb]

97. Good Point About What is Wrong

Where are your solutions to fix inner city schools. I'm sure your not advocating the Repuke solution to take even more money away from inner city schools, or are you? I grew up in a tough inner-city neighborhood in Columbus, OH. Both of my parents worked, but man, did they nag me about my school-work! Thanks mom and dad!

We are getting to the breaking point in this country with the "rich getting richer", the "poor getting poorer", and the "middle class getting poorer". For example: You have a poor single mother who wants nothing more than for her children to have a better life. Since Bush has cut off Welfare, Aid to Dependent Children, Medicare, Food Stamps, and MOST importantly, affordable, or free daycare, she now works two jobs, maybe three. She would love to attend a parent teacher conference, or stay home to make sure her kids do their school-work, but that's a difficult choice to make. Roof over their heads, "putting food their family" (as the pResident so eloquently put it), or going to a school function. Meanwhile, the top 1% can take their average $28,000 tax cut and send their kids to private school, or hire a maid (Bush plans to make maids cheaper under his immigration program you know), or even hire a tutor.

And for those who would argue about "welfare cheats and lazy people", I only can say one thing. For every 1 Welfare cheat, there are a thousand people like the woman in the above example.

I'm sure that all of the problems in the inner-city schools would be solved if we just give more money to the parochial schools. Or maybe (Bush's faith based nuts) can pray on it.

Oh wait! He will help that woman out by spending millions to tell her how she would be much better off staying with the man who beats her.

If you want to fix the schools, you need to invest in them. If not you might as well say, "screw it, the inner city folks are animals anyway". Then we could back to the good ol' days when we did not have public education. We could go back to the days when education was a luxury of the wealthy. We are a BETTER society, a BETTER community, a BETTER country, and a BETTER people, because we have public education

[Muddleoftheroad]

109. Solutions

There is no solution that will fix the inner city schools in time to save any of those who are currently there. As an African-American, I watch helpless as another generation of our young is virtually condemned to lifetimes of mediocrity by the pathetic urban school systems.

Till someone can fix what is horribly broken, I do indeed advocate every alternative available -- home schooling, experimental schools and vouchers.

For the future, we can't even so much begin at the school level. We need to work on fixing the cities, increasing opportunity, ending the war on drugs and working to eliminate the culture of crime and hopelessness that infect our streets.

To fix the schools, we can't just invest in them. The NEA and the federal and state governments have all failed. There are tens of thousands of good teachers out there, but their leadership and the leadership of this nation have failed them and us.

We need to commit to fixing not one problem but 100 or 1,000. We need a nationwide push to improve life in America. I see no viable chance that it will occur.

[Tansy_Gold]

123. Your three solutions are pipe dreams

1. Home schooling is ONLY applicable if the parents/caregivers can afford to do it. Most poor/low-income parents don't have the financial resources. Giving them vouchers to "afford" homeschooling would be great, if they themselves are qualified to teach. A parent who is barely literate cannot adequately prepare her/his children for higher education.

2. Vouchers are a chimera. They do NOT provide quality education for ALL the kids in "failing" schools. they do NOT provide all the resources -- social as well as educational -- for kids to go to private schools, schools which are not required to accept any and all kids the way public schools are. There are not enough private/alternative/charter schools to take care of all the kids in the "failing" schools anyway, so what do we do with the ones who are, indeed, "left behind?" Just write them off? Vouchers also do nothing whatsoever to fix the systemic problems you mention. Nothing at all. If the systemic problems aren't addressed, the vouchers are nothing but bandaids.

3. Alternative schools, otherwise known as "charter" schools in most cases. Arizona is one of the leading states in the charter school movement (one report in the Arizona Republic stated that Arizona had the highest number in the US), in which public tax monies are funneled into independent -- and often totally unqualified -- educational enterprises. In the overwhelming majority of these enterprises, the motive is profit, not education. Most of them are religious-oriented. In Arizona, they do not have to hire qualified teachers. A recent scandal here in the western suburbs of Phoenix concerned a school that IIRC was called Crown Academy. One of the teachers was discovered to be a convicted child molester. Few of the teachers were certified. Children were subjected to unsafe playground conditions. The operator of the school had a criminal background.

I wish I had access to all the articles published in our local weekly newspaper, West Valley View, regarding this particular school. I have googled and found nothing so far, but I could have the school's name remembered incorrectly. (On doing further research, I found some information at http://www.asu.edu/copp/morrison/december2001.htm; you'll have to scroll down several articles, but there is information on Crown Charter School.)

However,
http://www.findarticles.com/cf_dls/m0MJG/1_3/94893896/p6/article.jhtml?term= provides some interesting information:

<snip>
In Arizona, a record number of that state's charter schools--31 of 288 reviewed--were fined in 2002 because of "late audits, ignored testing requirements, and financial fraud." This represented more schools than the total number disciplined since charters began in Arizona in 1994.
<end snip>

and another
<snip>
Consider Techworld Charter School in the District of Columbia, The school was chartered by the elected D.C. board of education in 1997 and opened the following year. It was finally closed in June 2002 after three years of accounting irregularities, governance tiffs, and overreporting of enrollments, It was placed on probation several times during those three years, but was never adequately monitored by the board, which in 2000 was replaced by a new hybrid board of elected and appointed members. The new school board set out to close down the school but encountered a belligerent principal. Just before its closing, he instructed the school's financial manager to award him a $20,000 bonus, along with $5,000 each to eight other employees, including his wife. The school's board of directors began to consider legal action against the principal, whose wife then changed the password to the computer files containing students' grades, hoping to force the board members not to prosecute her husband.
<end snip>

Sadly, these are not isolated incidents. As you can see from the first snip, over 10% of the charter schools reviewed in Arizona in 2002 were fined for violations. Is this the kind of "alternative" school you advocate?

And again, I point to the test scores coming from the charter schools in the West Valley, scores on the 2002 Stanford 9 tests for Reading, Language, and Math:

Estrella High, 9th grade -- 20 14 22
PPEP Tec, 9th grade -- 18 13 30
Precision Academy, 9th grade -- 39 31 43

Crown Charter School -- which apparently only goes to 3rd grade -- posted the following scores:

2nd grade -- 21 18 21
3rd grade -- 45 46 45

I could make a lot of speculative analyses of those scores, but this isn't the place for that, at least not at the moment.


The points I'm trying to make are that these "alternatives" -- vouchers, charter schools, homeschooling -- do not address the systemic problems of socio-economic equality. Unless and until those issues are addressed, even if they aren't completely eradicated, the growing differences in the quality of public education will remain.

Two or three generations ago, the class stratification of our country matched the quality stratification of our public school systems. Rural kids who would go on to work on the farm would often quit school at the end of sixth or even eighth grade; the children of the wealthy families in small rural communities (I base this on the experience of my husband's family that lived for over 150 years in a rural community in Indiana) had access to the education they needed, and no one else needed it. But our society is not the same any more. Now EVERYONE needs a quality education, and we are trying to provide that education without any fundamental changes to the system, especially the system for funding.

I'm sorry if I've gone on and on and maybe even veered off onto some irrelevant tangents, but I truly believe that all these single-issue solutions are weapons of mass distraction thrown at us by the VRWC. They look good on paper (as another poster offered above) but they don't work when put into action.

(edited to add. . .. .)

Essentially what you keep saying is that "throwing more money" at the public schools, especially "throwing more money" at teachers' salaries, is not going to do any good, BUT -- on the other hand -- you suggest that "throwing more money" at programs that have been proven NOT TO WORK TO SOLVE THE FUNDAMENTAL PROBLEMS BUT WILL PUT LOTS OF TAXPAYER FUNDS IN THE HANDS OF FOR-PROFIT ENTREPRENEURS, i.e. home schooling, vouchers, and alternative/charter schools, WILL work. Sorry, but IMHO, your logic is totally awry and I'm not going to argue with it any more.

[Muddleoftheroad]

142. Lots of folks are using those pipes

1. Home schooling is no longer just one family at a time. Families have teamed up creating micro schools of home schooling parents. That eliminates many of your objections about time and affordability. At the same time, it enables parents to teach things they might be better suited to handle. I massively admire families who care so much for their children that they pursue this strategy.

2. No vouchers do not provide a quality education for all the children in "failing" schools. But if 100 children are in a burning school and will all die, should we stand there and let it happen or save half of them? I vote we save 50 rather than give up on all 100.

There is not enough of a voucher program in place to generate the new private schools that would occur if we had a national plan in place. If you build it, they will come, especially in urban areas.

I agree, let's address the systemic problems. But I accept that will take decades because that is how our nation operates. I am unwilling to consign thousands to the trash heap of history in the meantime.

3. D.C. has just started trying the charter school model. It can't possibly be worse. Just because the experiences haven't worked so far, doesn't mean we give up trying alternatives.

Yes, these solutions are NOT addressing systemic problems. Exactly. There is no national agreement on how to do so and that may never come. In the interim, we must take action. In some cases, any action is better than the current result.

[0007]

73. We do have a fantastic public education system

BRAVO!

[Muddleoftheroad]

86. Where?

See above.

[Pikku]

124. Here, among other places.

I can understand the frustration with a crappy local public school system. But don't make the mistake that the repubs make and say that because one school system is failing (or two, or ten), the entire educational system is rotten.

I teach in one of the poorest areas of the COUNTRY. My students live in mobile homes in the middle of the desert, often with no running water or sewer system. All of my students speak Spanish at home (yes, they are citizens). Oh yeah, we're in the 'miracle' state of Texas. Yet, we've been putting along fairly well in the 8 years I've been here.

We are NOT an example of George Putsch's miracle. We are doing as well as we are because of great students and their parents, a dedicated staff, and a hardworking administrative staff. In that order. We could do better, I think, but every teacher, every parent, and every student always thinks their education could be better.

There have been times when we didn't have funds for paper towels or toilet paper, so we bought our own. We fight over money for the stupidest things, yet there seems to be an endless supply of test-prep worksheets, test-prep textbooks, test-prep software, and let's not forget the test-prep tests. None of which we need, but the money for them is available, where the money to hire a librarian is not. (Google the link between George Bush and the McGraw-Hill publishing company sometime. There is big BIG money to be made in textbooks, test-prep and testing.) We no longer have music, art, computers, and our PE teachers have 66 students in a class.

I spend six days per year on one state-mandated reading test, another 3 on a district-mandated norm-referenced test, and countless others on the tests required for the "programs" that are supposed to teach our students better than we can alone.

But we manage. Every year the stick is held over our heads that next year's test will be harder, and that next year most of our kids would probably fail. I just got out of a workshop where the principal assured us that if our kids took the test according to next year's "standards" only 2% would pass. That's the constant message in schools now- you're failing, try harder. We have kindergartners in tutoring until 4:30 in the afternoon. It's madness.

Anyone coming from a co-dependent situation will recognize that message of "not good enough." They'll also recognize that, in such situations, there is NEVER going to be a "good enough" message. You're supposed to be afraid, you're supposed to fail, you're supposed to feel unworthy. That's the point.

Don't tell me "the schools are failing." Mine isn't, and it has every excuse to. George Bush has never done anything to help us, EVER, but f*** him, we're still doing pretty well. Without him, we could be doing better. Maybe we could have a science lab instead of a war. Maybe we could have a reading teacher instead of a tax cut. Maybe we could have some playground equipment and school band instruments instead of a constantly "improved" high-stakes test and the accompanying one-dimensional curriculum.

It pisses me off when people who have never been to my school, have never heard of my school, and can't find my school on a map tell me my school is a failure because sometime, somewhere, they heard of, or saw a school they didn't like. Not all schools are in need of complete gutting just because you think yours is. This is the republican strategy. Everyone can think of a bad teacher, or a crumbling building, or an objectionable experience the've had in a school. Repubs encourage people to believe that their bad experiences represent the whole of the public education system in this country. They back up this mirage with test scores, which we've seen repeatedly, can be designed to "prove" just about any argument- good or bad.

Want to be mad? Be mad at the people who think so little of your child, or the students in your neighborhood, that they impose what amounts to a remedial program on the entire school population, in the name of "higher standards." The contempt behind this approach is transparent. "Some" students can't learn like "other" students learn. Therefore they need "special" teaching. With "special" programs. Which happen to be for sale, federal NCLB grant money gladly accepted.

Here are a few starter links on the supposedly "failing schools." For those who will look, a lot more is available.

http://www.communityschools.org/bracey.html
http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/97oct/fail.htm
http://www.rethinkingschools.org/index.shtml

[Tansy_Gold]

127. a doff of the old fedora to you, pikku

:thumbsup:

Tansy Gold, who thought for a minute you were describing her neighborhood in Arizona!

[Pikku]

128. I imagine it's much the same Tansy

...and thanks. Your posts are good reading, too.

I just really get tired of defending myself and my kids in the interminable "failing schools, unions, test scores, immigrants, teachers" conversations.

[cosmik debris]

94. Inequality of pay

In Waco,Texas we have a choice of attending Baylor University for 4 years to get an education degree for about $75,000 or attending Texas State Technical College to get an Associates Degree in Biomedical Technology for about $15,000. Starting pay is about the same (depending on employer) but after five years the Biomed Tech will be making $5,000 to $10,000 per year more than the teacher.

The only reason I can see for a Wacoan to choose teaching is that they aren't very good at math. Or maybe, just maybe, the old fashioned value of sacrificing your own best interest for the good of the community is not dead after all. But it is certainly on its last legs. It certainly explains why Repukes don't choose the teaching profession. Even Laura Bush was a Democrat before she met Dubya.

[robbedvoter]

54. Another attempt to blow up public education!

Why do businessmen even have any standing on this? Why does Bar?

Clark on this:
For example, take the idea of competition in schools. OK now, what is competition in schools? What does it really mean? Well, competition in business means you have somebody who's in a business that has a profit motive in it. It's measured every quarter. If the business doesn't keep up, the business is going to lose revenue, therefore it has an incentive to restructure, reorganize, re-plan, re-compete and stay in business.

Schools aren't businesses. Schools are institutions of public service. Their job--their product--is not measured in terms of revenues gained. It's measured in terms of young lives whose potential can be realized. And you don't measure that either in terms of popularity of the school, or in terms of the standardized test scores in the school. You measure it child-by-child, in the interaction of the child with the teacher, the parent with the teacher, and the child in a larger environment later on in life.

So when people say that competition is-this is sort of sloganeering, "Hey, you know, schools need this competition." No. I've challenged people: Tell me why it is that competition would improve a school. Most of them can't explain it. It's just like, "Well, competition improves everything so therefore it must improve schools."

If you want to improve schools, you've got to go inside the processes that make a school great. You've got to look at the teachers, their qualifications, their motivation, what it is that gives a teacher satisfaction, what it is a teacher wants to do in a classroom. We've got to empower teachers. Give them an opportunity to lead in the classroom. Teachers are the most important leaders in America. All that is lost in the sloganeering of this party. And the American people know it's lost. So you asked me to give you one thing about this party that's in power -- it's the sort of doctrinaire ideology that doesn't really understand the country that we're living in.
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2003_09_28.html

[David__77]

61. NO! No, to linking pay to test scores!

Why would any teacher want to teach in an inner-city district? Work with recent immigrant children? This would only serve to further deprive the neediest schools of the best teachers. This is shameful.

[LibDemAlways]

63. This is already a reality at my daughter's elem school.

The teacher in each grade level whose class scores highest on the standardized tests receives a monetary bonus. You can bet the teachers spend a lot of time teaching the test. By the way, the school was awarded "Blue Ribbon" status this year. What a joke.

[Wonder_Cow]

78. whatever happened to education?

The point of school should not be to do well on some damned test! Already there is an obscene amount of "teaching to the test" it is not a good thing. This would destroy what reamins of education. You cannot quantify intellegence! When will they realize that?

</rant>

[ramapo]

79. What can we link politician's salaries to?

n/t

[ElsewheresDaughter]

83. cartoon in todays Times Union 1/15 Re: education reform

[Tansy_Gold]

84. As my son (who is not a teacher) would say. . .

"No fuckin' shit."

:grr:

[JackDragna]

87. This whole thing is hilarious.

There was a study performed in the mid 90's by the New York City Department of Education. The study found three factors about teachers corrolate most strongly with high student performance:

1. Experience (how long the teacher's been teaching)
2. Content knowledge (how much the teacher knows about the subject)
3. Cognitive ability (the teacher's general intelligence level and mental quickness)

In other words, the most effective teachers are smart, know their stuff and have some years under their belts during which said teachers have perfected their craft. If society wants good teachers, then it must recruit bright people and give them enough incentive to stay in school so their teaching effectiveness reaches its peak.

What society does, however, is drive the best potential teachers away. The job doesn't pay well and, even more importantly, has some of the worst working conditions of any public service job in America. More teachers quit in the first three years of teaching because of working condiitions than for any other reason. In other words, the few smart, dedicated people who take the job despite its low pay end up leaving because society expects them to do the impossible. Leashing teacher pay to performance is just part of the same vicious circle: it will most affect new teachers, who will tend to be the ones to teach most poorly, who won't get as many salary increases, who will then leave before they become good teachers. The idiocy of those who think this to be good policy is staggering.

[Muddleoftheroad]

92. Pay

You know, every thread we ever have here about teachers bemoans their poor pay. Guess what, LOTS of jobs don't pay well. As I sit and type this I am doing so from the comfort of a home guarded by police officers and firefighters who earn far less than many teachers yet risk their lives far more.

No matter what we all think of Iraq, we owe our safety to the men and women in the military, many of whom earn pathetic wages more reminiscent of a McJob.

Then there are the social workers, the prison guards and nurses, all doing valuable work for society.

Sorry, I feel bad for the many travails that teachers face, but they aren't alone in the salary problem.

[Tansy_Gold]

99. Not in Phoenix

An experienced firefighter can make a six-figure income in Phoenix and the surrounding areas, with minimal college loans to pay off. They are provided with all the equipment needed for their job, including training and physical fitness equipment. The fire captain who was in one of my college classes a couple years ago bragged that he made more than the dean of the college -- and we knew the dean made $103,000 because his salary had to be published in the campus newspaper.

A teacher, whose job requires at minimum a four-year BA or BS degree, starts at about $30,000 and may work up to $45,000.

The problem with the low pay for teachers is that they have to spend so much up front -- four years for that BA or BS, then an often required master's, all at their own expense. It's not only the expense of the education, but it's also the four or five years out of their earning time.

Someone who goes to college and gets a degree in marketing, engineering, or another "marketable" field (as if anything is marketable in the * economy) can expect to make a decent living based on the investment in their education.

This is NOT true of teachers or, as I mentioned above, social workers.

Remember, too, that many teachers, due to the school districts in which they teach, must supply out of their own pockets many of the items for their classrooms: supplemental reading materials, decorations, etc. They work nights and week-ends grading papers and creating tests or reviewing materials to use in the classroom. A dedicated teacher may also make her or himself available for parent conferences or remedial study time after school or before school.

I don't know what your personal problem is, muddle, but I think you need to step back and look at the wider picture of the national institution of public education in America and not base all your conclusions just on your experience in the DC schools. I'm not flaming you, by any means, but in my personal opinion, you're using a very narrow experience as a template for the whole system.

If I were to do that, based on my limited experience, I'd have to conclude that there is no problem with the system at all. I attended nice suburban Chicago schools, K-12, where teachers started there right out of college and stayed until they retired. There was no violence or drugs, we had nice new textbooks, plenty of supplies. We had art and music and phys ed and foreign languages and fully-equipped labs for science and shop and home ec and everything.

But my suburban Chicago schools of the 50s and 60s are no more. Literally. Ridge School that I attended K-5 in Arlington Heights is now a training center for an order of Catholic sisters. Arlington High School, from which I graduated in 196X :-), is now Liberty Academy, a christian K-12 school.

Regardless, I know that my experience was not the same as even my brother's or sister's, who went through the same school system more than ten years after I did. Nor was mine the same as my husband's in a rural system in Indiana. Nor the same as my kids' who went to school in a rural suburb of Phoenix.

Jonathan Kozol's book "Savage Inequalities" paints a series of chilling portraits of underfunded public schools and the heroic efforts of the teachers, administrators, and even students to survive and succeed under what can only be described as third-world conditions.

So yes, there are many jobs that pay less than a teacher's salary, but few of those low-paying jobs require the expensive training that a teacher is required to have nor do they have the incredible responsibility that a teacher has -- not only to teach our children to fulfill their potentials as individuals, but to watch over them every day, to monitor their health and safety, and so on. I know that as a mother raising two small children I sometimes despaired over the pressure of dealing with them day in and day out. But then I would think of the teachers who deal with a whole classroom of them, twenty or twenty-five or even thirty energetic, irrepressible little humans, and I would be amazed.

Therefore, I think it's highly insulting to say that teachers shouldn't be paid more on the sole justification that well, gee, there are other low paying jobs, too.

But that's just my opinion,

and I'm just,

Tansy Gold

[Muddleoftheroad]

108. Citations

Lacking a citation for that stunning stat, I will remain in disbelief.

Here are some links to other firefighter salaries:

Atlanta:

http://www.learnatest.com/firefighter/salarybenefits/atlanta.cfm

$26,498-37,426

Seattle

http://www.learnatest.com/firefighter/salarybenefits/seattle.cfm

$41,628-$50,507

Berkeley

http://www.dailycal.org/article.php?id=7835

$60,000 to $70,000


Then there's this:


Volume 8, Number 3: Public Safety Salaries Trends

http://www.foxlawson.com/newsletter/newsletters/volume83.cfm

In light of the September 11, 2001 tragedy, we researched our survey database to analyze the impact on public safety salaries. We developed this extensive database on salary information in government systems from the numerous compensation surveys that we conduct each year.

We compared salaries in 2001 (prior to September 11), with salaries after September 11. Within this database, both small and large cities/counties are represented, as well as cities/counties of all geographic locations of the United States (Northwest, West, Southwest, Midwest, Southeast and Northeast). All salary figures were adjusted to a National average so as not to be impacted by geographic differences among specific cities and locations. All salary figures were also trended forward to be effective April 1, 2002 in order to account for normal structure movement and normal increases in salaries.

Our findings reveal that since last year (prior to September 11th), these salaries have increased at rates greater than normal annual adjustment increase amounts. Specifically, while Police jobs did not increase significantly, Fire jobs did. Below is a table showing the percentage increase in median actual salaries by job.

Firefighter, Intermediate Level 24.0%
Firefighter, Senior Level 14.2%
Fire Captain 15.1%
Fire Division Chief 16.8%
Fire Chief 17.6%
Police Officer, Intermediate Level 1.5%
Police Sergeant 1.9%
Police Lieutenant 8.4%
Police Chief 4.1%

As we expected, Firefighters showed the highest increase. Because these figures only reflect the increase in actual salaries from one year to the next, emphasis should not be placed on this increase figure alone. Actual median salaries should be referenced and compared to your organization's actual salaries to determine if your salaries are competitive with the current market.

Listed below are the median actual salaries prior to September 11 and post September 11 for the public safety jobs. Remember that these salary figures are on a national basis and effective for April 1, 2002.

Then there's this:

Prior to 9/11
Firefighter, Intermediate Level $35,352
Firefighter, Senior Level $42,126
Fire Captain $57,982
Fire Division Chief $55,052
Fire Chief $92,597
Police Officer, Intermediate Level $45,302
Police Sergeant $57,470
Police Lieutenant $61,619
Police Chief $101,144

Post 9/11
Firefighter, Intermediate Level $43,842
Firefighter, Senior Level $48,088
Fire Captain $66,727
Fire Division Chief $64,323
Fire Chief $108,874
Police Officer, Intermediate Level $45,976
Police Sergeant $58,557
Police Lieutenant $66,781
Police Chief $105,277

Now teachers:

http://www.aft.org/research/survey02/SalarySurvey02.pdf

Avg. teacher salary for 2002 is $44,367
California pays the highest with an average of $54,348.

Again, I am not demeaning teachers. They do hard, essential, challenging work. But they do not put their lives on the line in most cases. Firefighters, soldiers and police officers do this every day.

As for my own experience, it's not just D.C. It's Baltimore as well. But I have read far beyond that. The urban (read minority) school districts have failed and aren't simply "failing." They continue to graduate tens of thousands of students into the workforce who can hardly read or write and are unprepared for a life outside of school.

[Tansy_Gold]

116. Stats and cites

Look at the stats you provided:

Pre-9/11/01, the MEDIAN for a fire captain was ~$58,000. And I explicitly stated that the firefighter in my class was a captain, not a new recruit. And to be precise, the class was held in the spring semester of 2001, prior to the WTCetc attacks, so I will use those figures.

The MEDIAN you posted for all teachers is ~$44,000.

Regarding STARTING pay for Phoenix firefighters:

While in training, Firefighter Recruits command a highly competitive annual salary in the range of $24,752.00--$26,145.00. Upon graduation from the Training Academy and promotion to Firefighter, the annual salary increases to between $30,016-- $42,459.

http://www.azoic.org/programs/fire.htm

I do not have any explanation as to the wide range for Firefighter salary, but note that it is paid upon graduation, and one presumes there are routine increases from there, depending on promotions, etc. I do not, therefore, consider it inconceivable that a Phoenix fire captain could make a six figure salary.

The captain who was in my class had been with PFD for at least 10 years. Salaries for faculty at state universities in Arizona are public information, and the dean's salary had been published in the campus newspaper at $103,000. As he was one of the instructors for the class, the fire captain made the comparison himself -- the class discussion concerned the writings of Marx, Lukacz, and Eagleton -- that he made more as a firefighter captain than the professor did as dean of the college.

At approximately the same time, my future son-in-law was taking his first teaching assignment, at a salary of $26,000: junior high social studies. My daughter was at the time a case manager for Child Protective Services at $24,000.

I'm not disparaging the wages paid to firefighters or police officers: I know they do dangerous work. But the value of work should not be equated only with its inherent danger: IIRC, meat packers suffer more work-related serious injuries and death than any other profession.

It just seems to me that you're arguing consistently against the raising of teacher pay on the basis that other people aren't paid as much as you seem to think they should be and therefore teachers shouldn't be either. I don't think that was ever the discussion here, but rather that it was irrational to tie teacher salaries to the performance of their students on standardized tests, totally ignoring the myriad other influences that affect those test scores.

Many schools in DC, East St Louis, south Phoenix, the Mississippi Delta, and other places are shining :puke: examples of everything that's wrong with the American public school system. I just happen to think it's very short-sighted to think that NOT paying teachers what they're worth is going to help.

On the other hand, there are many good schools in this country, and the entire system of public education is what produced most of us.

I think you've allowed yourself to be distracted by a narrow ideology, one which I haven't even exactly identified. The fact that big bucks are thrown at the failing DC schools doesn't mean that's the CAUSE for the failure, any more than the salaries of firefighters should be used as a benchmark for determining how much to pay teachers.

But again, that's just me,
and I'm just,

Tansy Gold

[Muddleoftheroad]

121. Multiple points

First off, a fire captain is the equivalent of a principal, not a teacher. He or she commands men and women in battle and risks lives and property every day. Sorry, but teachers don't do that.

I do still consider it wildly inconceivable that a Phoenix fire captain could make $100,000 a year. If he or she does, my guess is there would be hell to pay about it.

Actually, I disagree about the value of work. Of course it should be equated with its inherent danger. Higher risk jobs pay better. They should.

Actually, I am arguing that money won't solve this problem. I am also arguing that, as a class, the only civil servants who seem to consistently complain about pay on a national level are teachers, though they are far from the only ones at that salary level.

Yes, we have headed off on a tangent. I clearly don't think tying salaries to test scores does anything and I think most here agree.

Where we disagree in the state of education in the U.S.

Unless you pay teachers 10 times what they are earning in DC, East St Louis, south Phoenix, the Mississippi Delta, and other places, you are not likely to change who teaches them. Even then, you are not likely to change the result.

Yes, we USED TO have a system of public education that worked. It has declined precipitously over the last few decades.

[Tansy_Gold]

126. I think you're wrong on every one of your multiple points

First of all, I don't have a problem with a fire captain -- which is what I stated he was from the very first, so YOU were the one equating him with a teacher, not I -- making $100,000 a year. I think the training, risks, and skills necessary to do that job make the qualified individuals worth every cent. One of my best friends was chief of a rural fire district and was tragically killed in a non-fire accident not too long ago. One of the noblest, bravest, most dedicated individuals I have ever met. I don't know how much he made in salary, but it wasn't enough.

Second, if danger were the only basis on which jobs were paid, CEOs, secretaries, and librarians ought to work for free, non? Oh, except that another of my best friends was the public librarian who was brutally raped and murdered one October afternoon at the library. . . . See, I think there ought to be multiple determiners for how much a person is paid -- skill, education, experience, danger, responsibility, and oh yes, eventual value of the product of their work.

Third, postal workers have gone on strike, so I guess they don't speak loudly enough for you to consider them complaining loudly enough. Oh, yes, and the air traffic controllers. And the garbage collectors. And the transit workers. Police in many communities have come down with epidemics of 'blue flu' many times over the years. Teachers, for some reason or other, are criticized if they dare complain that they are underpaid. Yet many of them are SO underpaid that they qualify for food stamps. At $24,000 a year, the starting salary in many school districts, a teaching professional cannot afford to buy a house, a new car, or even comfortably pay off that mountain of education loans. And because teachers aren't seen to be providing an "essential" service -- like police or firefighters or garbage collectors -- their strikes and their whines usually fall on deaf or disgusted ears.

Fourth, no one is suggesting paying teachers anywhere "10 times" what they make. For many, a mere doubling would suffice, and I'm not being entirely facetious about that. Is $40,000 an outrageous salary for someone who teaches the fundamentals of reading and arithmetic to our most precious resource, our children? We watch as the Steinbrenners and Colangelos bid literally millions on baseball or basketball players, but we can't cough up $40,000 for a good teacher? And if that raise in salary kept teachers in their field beyond the three-year burn-out phase, kept them so they could hone and polish their skills and become recognized leaders in their school communities, figures of respect and admiration, you don't think that would have some impact on their students? You don't think it would help the kids to learn better if they came to school every day and had a teacher who was well-rested (hadn't been up all night worrying whether the 14-year-old Civic would start in the morning, or been out working a second job) and eager to teach kids in a clean, climate-comfortable room, well supplied with books, paper, pencils, computers, etc?

Fifth, our school system hasn't changed. WE have changed, and we need to recognize that the education system that sufficed 20, 40, 80 years ago doesn't suffice now. Some of the minor but not fundamental changes that have been made to it in response to changes in our society over the past few years weren't perhaps the best changes that could have been made. Maybe we need to undo some of them. But fundamentally, the underlying principles of our system are sound -- a quality and equal education FREE and AVAILABLE to all. Not gimmicks, not for-profit schemes. Just solid, free, available quality education.

The problem is what's FREE to the user isn't FREE to the supplier, and yes, the paradox is that they are one and the same in a democracy like ours. We all pay the taxes, but likewise we all benefit from the superior product turned out by our public education system.

Unfortunately, the get-rich-quick schemes of the right wing -- the ones who would privatize public education through vouchers and charter schools -- do not serve the public. They can't and they won't.

[Muddleoftheroad]

137. Impasse

We can go round and round on this one. At least I respect that you care about the subject. Maybe if more people did, we'd be in a better position on education.

I never said danger was the ONLY basis for pay, but it is significant. So are many other factors, but if those other factors are largely equal, danger is a big one. In a public service job, I think danger matters quite a lot.

Yes, many other groups have gone on strike or complained. None ever has amassed the litany of complaints that teachers have mustered. Perhaps it is merely the whiny leaders at the NEA that encourage this, I can't say.

The starting salary you mention for teachers is better than most journalists I used to work with. I doubt you could get $24,000 coming out of college in most journalistic outlets in the nation. Doesn't make it a good salary, just puts it in perspective.

Teachers DO provide an "essential" service -- like police or firefighters or garbage collectors. But that service is not as demanding as that police and firefighters provide.

I didn't say you were suggesting 10 times an increase. My point was that even that much of an increase wouldn't solve the problems.

I would love to see teachers earn more money, but we have a market-based economy and many people are drawn to liberal arts professions. That creates a surplus of employees and lowers their value. If someone could teach with the same impact that Barry Bonds has on baseball, then hopefully they would earn the same. But I doubt we can even vaguely compare the two.

In your fourth point, you also mention several problems of funding in the schools beyond teacher pay. Yes, there are many such problems, but money doesn't automatically solve them. How schools spend the money (too many administrators for instance) is an issue. If you give the systems the money, there is no guarantee they will spend it wisely.

Actually, I half agree with your last point. I think both have changed, some for the better some for the worse. We have integrated, we have millions of immigrants who speak little English, etc. We have added on a test craze and replaced it with another test craze.

Society has changed as well. Single parent homes are much more common and parental involvement much less so. Suburban flight has created urban areas filled with problems and urban school districts unable to cope.

Fundamentally, the underlying principles of our system are NOT sound. We talk a good game. We talk about "a quality and equal education FREE and AVAILABLE to all," but we don't provide it. No, not even close. It will take years or decades to do something about the urban districts that are failing so miserably. Our children can't wait for that. They need to be saved now not later.

[JackDragna]

117. Yes, but few of those jobs require so much human interaction..

..and, arguably, so much brain power to do well. I have nothing against the firefighters or prison guards of the world, but teaching taxes one's mental faculties in a unique way. If the pay isn't higher, bright people won't put up with the crap.

[Muddleoftheroad]

122. Firefighters

Firefighters and police interact with the public constantly. The jobs require not only physical health but mental excellence. Have you ever even looked a fire engineering text? It contains the interactions of an almost infinite number of chemicals with one another. It holds the temperatures at which everything burns.

Firefighters need to know not just how things burn and buildings burn, but how people act and react in those situations. They need to know emergency medicine and be able to save lives at a moment's notice. We pay them to risk their lives and to go into burning buildings.

Again, teachers don't have an easy job, but they don't have it that hard either.

[JackDragna]

130. That's a sight different..

..than having to not only teach kids, but get them to behave. They have to deal with abused kids, kids with learning disabilites, malnourished kids and so on. The term "in loco parentis" isn't bandied about among firefighters, police officers or social workers. For seven hours a day, teachers have to watch these kids. Some teachers don't have it that hard, but many teachers do have it extremely hard and have to deal with people's real problems on a level that would make a firefighter or police officer quit their job.

[Muddleoftheroad]

134. Who are you kidding

The same kids in those classrooms are the ones on the street. The police officers and firefighters deal with them every day. Not only that, they risk their lives by continuing to deal with the worst and most dangerous problems in our society.

[callous taoboy]

136. Muddle, walk

a mile in my shoes.

[callous taoboy]

102. Also,

what many districts do, as a cost-cutting measure, is offer incentives to experienced teachers to retire early so the district can lop off the employees at the upper end of the pay scale.

[moondust]

95. Makes sense. For CEOs.

Right idea, wrong target! The CEO can drive the company directly into the ditch costing it billions yet he/she will still get their multimillion-dollar salary and multimillion-dollar bonus in return for their ineptitude!

Performance is irrelevant, Lou. You should know that better than anybody.

[Okole]

98. Have parents tax status tied to kids scores.

If the kids are scoring low, raise the parents tax level until they are forces to help the child. Since the kids who score lower are the ones who will cost us the most to maintain jails and other social programs, the parents need to pay for it.

[Tansy_Gold]

100. Please see my posts #41 and #47 above

The posts to which I was replying were explained as tongue-in-cheek, but I don't think yours is.

Taxing poor people because their kids don't learn is about stupid and a half.

Nuff said.

Tansy Gold, who is not stupid, not even half.

[Okole]

101. Ha! I should have read the entire thread more carefully.....

Actually my post was tongue-in-cheek too. Seeing as how most low scoring kids have uneducated parents there is no way that would work...I actually think a better solution would be to repeal the tax exempt status religions get, tax them, then put the money toward education.
You are a better writer than I am.

[Tansy_Gold]

104. Thanks, Okole

DU really does need a new icon for blushing.

[Corgigal]

129. low scoring kids have uneducated parents

Really, since when? I have a disable son who can only have tutoring if he fails those damn tests. I am thankful that he fails it every year. I found this out because one year he passed the stupid test and they pulled his tutoring because of it, which made him fail the following year.

Sorry we won't make the same mistake again. He can't pass period without tutoring. He has to have repetition over and over to have the informational process time. Since the school don't care anymore what a child actually needs to pass his grade, but only cares what some lame ass test score is on one day of their life then I will continue to hope every year he fails.

I have no other options and if teachers don't want to teach him then I could care less. I care about my 11 year old who is not getting a fair shake.

[Tansy_Gold]

133. Your post is perfect evidence IMHO of why the bandaids don't. . .

. . . .fix the underlying problems.

We have to have a healthy system that affords, within itself, the solutions to all the problems, rather than farming them out so "the system" only deals with the non-problems. 'Cause, hey, if the system farms out the ADHD kids, the learning disabled, the developmentally disabled, the abused and undernourished, the poor and the spoiled, then, hey! Everyone IN THE SYSTEM will get high scores and the system will work fine!!!! Yay! </sarcasm off, added in edit>

There was a brouhaha here in the Phoenix area several years ago when a student with disabilities was enrolled in one of the public schools and the cost of taking care of him/her nearly bankrupted the district. People were outraged. "Why should the whole school system suffer because one kid has special needs??" And I have to admit that I shared some of their feelings. But you know what? WITHIN THE SYSTEM means were found to give everyone, including the student with the disabilities, what they needed.

My son, who is now 26, was the unfortunate recipient of a terrible experience in kindergarten due to the presence of a child with severe disabilities in his class -- and the fact that the school system made no provisions for ALL the students. I won't bore all of you with the details, but suffice it to say that of the 28 children in that class, only 6 -- less than 25% -- entered second grade two years later; the rest were held back in kindergarten, in first grade, or put into various remedial programs. (By comparison, from the other 3 K classes in the same school, the promotion rate to second grade was over 80%). My son was one of those who stayed on the standard track because he had parents (and an older sister) who helped.

But even children who had well-educated parents and parents who cared still couldn't overcome the disadvantages inflicted on them by a system that didn't work in that one class. Was the solution to offer them vouchers to go to another school? THERE WEREN'T ANY OTHER SCHOOLS AVAILABLE. Was the solution to subject them to homeschooling rather than socialize with their friends, engage in sports and games, force their parents to quit their jobs?

The point is, we have to make the system work -- and make it workable -- for everyone. I would guess that 75-80% of the time, it works just fine. Arizona has a high high school dropout rate, and that needs to be fixed. Other areas of the country probably have other problems. But these problems can be fixed WITHIN a system that already works pretty darn well. Applying bandaid solutions that remove the low-scoring kids from the system is, imho, dishonest, and doesn't serve the system, the country, or the kids very well at all, whether they are high achievers or low.

Now, the next question is,

if I'm so smart, why ain't I rich? ;-)

the overeducated and unemployed,

Tansy Gold

[Heddi]

103. STOP SAYING WE'VE PUT "ENOUGH MONEY" Into Education

we've NEVER put "enough money" into Education.

If Schools got "enough money", then there wouldn't be texbook shortages. There wouldn't be equipment shortages. There wouldn't be kids who had to sit on the floor b/c there weren't enough desks for the students. We wouldn't have kids learning in creaky trailers without heat or A/C instead of learning in a building.

WE HAVE NEVER PUT "ENOUGH MONEY" Into Education.

That's like giving a family of 4 $10,000 a year in welfare. Well, they can't make it on $10,000 a year, so we'll give them $12,000 a year. They can't make it on $12,000 a year...WHY DO WE KEEP PUMPING MONEY INTO THESE WELFARE FAMILIES---maybe because we're not giving them enough to begin with.

Education has always been the LAST priority for states money. I went to school in South Carolina, the state that generally ties with Mississippi in lowest SAT scores, lowest % of HS graduates, lowest literacy rates, lowest skills assessments---piss poor state that spends NOTHING on its schools, yet expects everyone to excel, for teachers to be the top notch, for every student to be an A+ student that qualifies for more scholarships than are available.

It's not happening.

We've never FULLY FUNDED education in the way that it needs to be funded.

Someone pointed out above that "Money for Schools" doesn't necessarily equal "Money for Education". It means money to replace 40 year old radiators in classrooms that don't heat. It means replacing roofs that leak onto students heads. It means fixing the piss-poor schools STRUCTURALLY that kids are attending.

Generally, after they do a half-assed job on the schools to fix them structurally, there's little to no money left for EDUCATIONAL expenses.

I'm not a teacher, but I know some people who are teachers. They're good people who got into the profession because they knew that EVERYONE who was great had someone to educate them to be great. But they get into the schools and the idealism of "Goodbye Mr. Chips" is thrown out the window. Red tape all the way.

THey have to pay for their own supplies (Shouldn't things like siscors for kids be included in money spent by the school?), pay for copies of homework and tests (Shouldn't the schools be providing that service?) Pay for books, pay for paper, pay for pencils and chalk and dry-erase markers.

The only thing the school provides is a crumbling building and less-than sympathetic administrators who are more interested in making sure that they get some kind of deal from a super-star athelete than they are about making sure that the students in the classroom learn.

I graduated HS in 1994. I was the LAST GENERATION of kids that weren't "taught for the test". We had standardized tests in 3rd, 5th, 8th, 9th, 10th, and 12th grade. It wasn't until I was a senior that my school district started implementing standardized tests for ALL Grade levels, and no one could go up in grade if they didn't pass the tests. No matter what their grade was in the class, the STANDARDIZED TEST was the end-all be-all of class graduation.

I've kept in touch with my teachers from High School. I was in AP and Honours classes. I had teachers that taught free thought. They taught away from the text-books. They had us read compelling literature, and taught us history that wasn't included in the book. Geography included our teacher showing us slides of his 3-year trip through Europe as a college graduate. Personal stories of culture and country.

Now, those teachers can't teach like that. Even AP English has become a cookie-cutter class where the AP class reads the same that the CP classes do, which reads the same as the General/Basic English classes do. There's no need to strive for excellence--only strive to ace the test so that 16-year olds aren't sitting in an 8th grade classroom because they didn't have math skills.

-When I was in HS, I wasn't good at Math. Constantly failed my Math Classes. But I aced English, US History, Biology, Economics, Geography, World History, etc. But math was my downfall. Looking at the tests now, I would NOT have graduated on time because I was lacking in math skills had I had to take those tests as grade-advancement requirements.

The kids in General Math are required to take a test that is formatted for kids in CP (College Prep) Math. They can't pass it. They don't pass it. The tasks are beyond their comprehension (shit...many of them are beyond MY comprehension, and I've got an AS degree, and working to get my AARN degree in a year).

I had a 3.8 GPA in High School, but only got an 880 on my SAT because of the math portion. It was beyond me.

---

Why should Teachers be paid according to their student's success level in the classroom?

We don't pay doctors on the percentage of patients that outlive a disease. Or percentage of patients that die during surgery (not talking about malpractice). We don't pay doctors according to how many of their patients heed medical advice and do the best they can with their condition----Imagine a doctor getting a pay cut b/c a patient of theirs with Lung Cancer continues to smoke after repeated warnings not to do so.

Teaching is not a Commission-Based job. It shouldn't be, and that's what this measure is proposing. Students aren't going to do better, because students CAN'T do better in the conditions that they're in. You can only learn SO MUCH when your classroom is filled with 34 other people crowding into a space designed to hold 20 people, when your library's most recent edition of The WOrld Book Encyclopedia was printed in 1995. When there aren't computers to do assignments, and when your History Teacher is also a Basketball Coach and unavailable after class because he's got a game to go to and he's got to pick up the rental basketballs since the school can't afford to buy ones for their own.

How can you learn when all you're being taught are ROTE MEMORIZATION? There's no LEARNING--just recitation of facts and figures that are given to you. There's no room for growth, only room to stuff your head with things that aren't explained and put into any context other than "LEARN THIS OR YOU WON'T GRADUATE"

It's so easy to blame teachers because to actually LOOK at the problems, and how they AREN'T being solved would actually force people to use COMMON SENSE AND LOGIC---unfortunately, COMMON SENSE and LOGIC aren't required learning for standardized tests, therefore they are unimportant in our culture these days.

[callous taoboy]

105. Kids are not

widgets to be put away on shelves at the end of the day. We teachers send them off to home environments, some of which help them thrive, some of which do irreparable harm.

This plan stinks, and I am pissed that NEA isn't howling!

[Heddi]

106. Well I think you have two kinds of parents

that aren't involved in their kids education:

The parents that CAN'T be involved--due to working jobs, or due to their own lack of basic education (found mainly in poor and working-poor-middle-class neighborhoods)

and

The parents that DON'T WANT to be involved. The ones who think that Schools are surrogate homes, who think that teachers are surrogate parents, and that every positive influence in that child's life should come between the hours of 8am and 4pm.

The second set of parents are generally found in more affluent neighborhoods, but I don't want to stereotype. There are complacent parents in all income brackets who either can't, don't, or won't give their child enrichment at home, or support at home, and expects the schools to do EVERYTHING for that child.

I saw this when I went to school. The poor kids that excelled had parents who worked late 7 days a week, but did what they could for their children. They knew that education was the KEY to preventing a circular pattern of poverty and desperation. They may not have known the math, but they made sure homework was done every night, and they attended parent-teacher conferences, and were as involved in their children's education as they possibly could be.

The "rich" kids that excelled had parents where generally mom stayed at home because the household could afford it. They'd send the kids to SAT prep-classes (upwards of $500 a session). They'd hire tutors. They were involved in their child's education, but to a lesser degree than other parents. They wouldn't show up at Parent-Teacher conferences. The only input they had with the Teacher was when the teacher would DARE teach something that went against their moral values, or had their kids read a book that used the word "fuck", or taught Sex-Ed, or the values of using a condom.

I know that the above statements are really oversimplified, and sort-of stereotyping, but I dont mean for it to be that way.

My mother wasn't educated past High School. LIke me, math was her weak point. She couldn't help me with many of my subjects because she just didn't have the education to do so. But she was involved in every way possible, and never let me slack-off. She never let me go withuot doing my homework. SHe READ my reportcards, and met with teachers if I was failing a class to see what *I* needed to do and what *SHE* needed to do.

She never blamed teachers for my lack of success. They gave me the tools---I just refused to use them in many cases.

But many parents LOVE to blame teachers. Johnny could NEVER get an F in Algebra because he skips class every day and snoozes when he's there. It MUST be the teacher's fault.

Mary is TOO SMART to Fail English, even though she doesn't do her homework and sees class as more of a time to socialize and gossip than to actually learn the material.


Brad is NOT a bad student. It HAS to be the teacher's fault that he's been suspended four times this year for fighting, once for being caught smoking in the bathroom, and is facing expulsion for stealing another kids' homework and passing it off on his own. Why, those things have NOTHING to do with parenting, and EVERYTHING TO DO WITH THE LACK OF SKILLS POSSESSED BY THE TEACHER :eyes:

[Tansy_Gold]

107. Bravissima!

My daughter graduated in 1994 -- and I have a feeling her time in an underfunded rural Arizona school wasn't a whole lot different from yours.

She now has a BSW and is working on her masters in speech pathology. Hang in there.

[aquart]

110. Another fine incentive to falsify scores.

I knew they could do it.

[gill]

111. spread the word www.infamousidiot.com

[TXDemGal]

120. Fine idea, Lou! How 'bout we also link the compensation

of corporate executives to the finanacial soundness and performance of their companies?

Hey, it could happen. NOT.

[shugah]

131. wow! great thread!

i have read thru it, and have shouted agreement, snarled disagreement, laughed a little bit, decided that at least one stealth conservative can be put on ignore, appreciated teachers even more (my Mom is one), and as a parent who takes my children's education seriously - not just at school, but as a rule - i am happy to see so many educators and friends of educators here saying what is right and true!

[0007]

132. I agree

bbt

[ProfessorGAC]

135. They Always Miss The Actual Solution

This is a solution in search of a problem.

The solution is to equitize by region, the compensation for teachers.

The property tax basis for school funding is the principle contributing cause to the problems described in the article. As soon as a teacher can move to a more affluent school district, it happens simply because it's the fastest route to better pay.

If all school districts were to have a more compressed pay range, by region of country or state, then there would be less motivation for good teachers to move from school to school, less reason to leave the field entirely, and more balance in educational quality across public schools in divergent socioeconomic areas.

Now, if we could do this and then do something about the Education Colleges hyperdependence on pedagogy and method, and more on leading and communicating, i think we'd be on to something.
The Professor

[w4rma]

139. Trying to force them to work harder for less, rather than FUNDING schools

properly.

(Tax) Incentives for the wealthiest. Punishment for the rest of us.