Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
performance, how you you propose that we do this? Consider the following:
We are dealing with human beings who have different personalities, life experiences and moods. Students are sick or absent from school often (usually not the child's fault unless you are dealing with a teenage student) and the list goes on.
If you want it based on test scores what about:
Kindergartners and first graders? It is developmentally inappropriate to test five and six year old children and get accurate results. Then you would have to consider that you are dealing with children who have had a very wide range of experiences. Some come to Kindergarten already reading because they have supportive, literate parents who know how to parent their children. Some come not even being able to recognize their names, colors or shapes and don't even know the difference between a letter, a number, a word and a sentence.
As they get older you are dealing with the same issues. We want them all at the same place by the end of the school year, but still you are dealing with children who have parents who are illiterate, in jail, who have never owned a book or taken them to the library, who have abused and/or neglected them and who haven't given them a meal since yesterday's free school lunch, as well as children whose parents are members of PTA, who discipline and love their children, read to their children and talk and play with their children. There is no equality and it rarely levels out over the years.
How do you propose we rate music teachers, art teachers, PE coaches, band directors, chorus directors, home economics teachers, Media Specialists, foreign language teachers, guidance counselors, etc.?
What about the difference in test scores between the teachers of students in IB programs, gifted classes, etc., teachers of students in general ed classrooms in mostly middle class socioeconomic schools and teachers of students in very poor neighborhoods? What about teachers who teach special ed children? I had two students moved out of my K classroom last year and into an ESE program because their IQ full scale scores were 60. Is it fair to pay a teacher based on those students' scores?
You could base it largely on the evaluation by the school administrator, but those can be very political. I have had the personal privilege of having one who would rate you lower if he didn't agree with something you said or did, even if it had nothing to do with what was going on in your classroom. Thankfully those types of probably few and far between, but they're out there and can ruin careers.
As a teacher for 27 years and a parent of two young adult children and one going to middle school next year I agree that there are some teachers out there who should have never entered the profession and some who have taught long and hard and need to consider retirement, but those too are few and far between. Consider too that we can only go as far academically and with discipline as the school district and states will allow us to go. We cannot just automatically retain children, place them in special classes without testing, staffing and if necessary, due process and cannot just expel or throw them out. Nor can we move into their homes to show them a little love, discipline them, make sure they get a bedtime story, a good night's rest and a good dinner. Those decisions and rights are not ours.
Paying teachers more is not the solution to improve the schools. You can clearly see, from all your questions, that devising such a system would cause too many problems. The teachers/administrators would waste so much time trying to game the system. The major problem with the school system is the fact that most of the money sent to schools DOES NOT go to the classroom. It goes to other stuff that has zero effect on classroom performance.
The solution to solve this is to move to a voucher system. Allocate public dollars to each student and the student can decide what school to attend. That will introduce a very competitive atmosphere for educating children. The schools that perform best will be rewarded with more students wanting to go to the school. Schools will become more specialized as well. For example, there will be schools that will cater to specific students like the blind, hearing impaired or mentally disabled. All of the waste and bureaucracy will be eliminated. Schools will be forced to deliver the best value or they will simply lose their customers (the students).
In the above system, teachers will be paid what they are worth. A teacher that does not perform well will simply be let go and teachers that perform exceptionally will be rewarded with continued employment, bonuses and other such incentives.
You are absoultely right about throwing money to the schools. Most indeed doesn't go where it needs to go.
As for the voucher system, you still cannot insure that the schools are going to be equal. You give each family with students a certain amount of money. Great. What are you going to do about those families who cannot even afford to transport their children to the school of their choice (believe me, I taught in a very low socioeconomic income Title I school for 21 years, so I know they're out there in great numbers)? What about students whose parents cannot afford to provide their lunch, or give them breakfast? Most private schools do not provide that. There are other factors involved here too. Basically though, the schools in the lowest income neighborhoods are going to be left with the poorest of the poor students. How is that fair? Then even if those schools somehow perform well, if they are in a bad neighborhood which middle and upper middle class families are going to choose to send their children there if they are fearing for their safety?
What about parents who are so worried about where the rent money is coming from next month or so addicted to crack, that they cannot even entertain the thought of choosing "the best school"? Sadly in many, many homes, school choice is not a priority.
Then your idea of catering to students who are blind, deaf, behaviorally challenged or learning disabled, how are they going to compete and draw in large numbers of students? There are only a certain number of students who would qualify, then you have the issue of some of those problems being problems created by the parents in the first place (many behavior issues, children who've been neglected or abused, etc.). In not all, but most cases, those are the very parents who either are too stressed about other life issues to care, or too unconcerned to care.
Again, how are you going to determine what a teacher is worth? If I teach in a lower income school or a school catering to special ed students and my children do not produce test scores as high as others in more elite schools, I would be paid less. How is that fair? I may be a teacher who is dedicated, tutors students after school for free, buys books for my students to take home and keep, transports parents to programs and PTA meetings, meets parents without transportation, in their homes for a conference or conferences by phone with them. Still, I don't have the higher test scores so after expending all my energy to do those things and more, I am going to lose my job because students aren't flocking to my school. How is that fair?
performance, how you you propose that we do this? Consider the following:
We are dealing with human beings who have different personalities, life experiences and moods. Students are sick or absent from school often (usually not the child's fault unless you are dealing with a teenage student) and the list goes on.
If you want it based on test scores what about:
Kindergartners and first graders? It is developmentally inappropriate to test five and six year old children and get accurate results.
snip
Fair proposals? I would love to hear them!
Nancy
First thing that needs be done is to determine what the problem is. Is it we are not "investing" enough money into education?
I don't think so. The United States is #3 in spending for education below only Switzerland and Austria. We spend more per student than Japan, Germany, Britain, France, Australia, Canada, New Zealand and and the list goes on to include everyone in the world but Austria and Switzerland.
The Kansas City Experiment, to the embarrassment of many in the business of education, proved money isn't the answer.
Quote:
The situation in Kansas City was both a major embarrassment and an ideological setback for supporters of increased funding for public schools. From the beginning, the designers of the district's desegregation and education plan openly touted it as a controlled experiment that, once and for all, would test two radically different philosophies of education. For decades critics of public schools had been saying, "You can't solve educational problems by throwing money at them." Educators and advocates of public schools, on the other hand, had always responded by saying, "No one's ever tried."
snip
When estimates of the cost of the initial version of the plan came back, the lawyers and education activists who had designed the plan were shocked at their own audacity. The $250 million cost was a staggering amount in a district whose normal budget was $125 million a year. But that was only the start. By the time he recused himself from the case in March 1997, Clark had approved dozens of increases, bringing the total cost of the plan to over $2 billion--$1.5 billion from the state and $600 million from the school district (largely from increased property taxes).
snip
The ratio of students to instructional staff was 12 or 13 to 1, the lowest of any major school district in the country
The whole experiment, throwing billions at a single school district over the period of a generation, ended up to be a colossal failure.
Our problem is our refusal to come to grips with the reality some students are born stupid, some are born to be dish washers and ditch diggers and throwing billions at the "problem" won't solve anything.
While some students are born stupid others are made stupid by stupid parents that government subsidizes in their effort to create even more stupid kids.
One of the problems in this country is government has created a situation where the stupids are encouraged to have more while those who should have more aren't. We are a nation being taken over by stupids.
And we blame teachers.
It isn't the teachers it's mostly the fault of stupid parents and nothing can be done about that less create a situation where having stupid kids isn't rewarded.
By age six it is GAME OVER. In fact some would argue (and I agree) that by age three it is GAME OVER so how do we expect teachers to fix damaged goods that were damaged beyond repair before they ever lay eyes on them?
The whole testing is farcical.
First thing we need to do is to close the department of education. Seems we were doing a much better job in educating the young before the federal government climbed in. I am sure the framers of the Constitution would be shocked by this.
Return school control totally to the state and local level.
Get rid of teachers unions. Government employees at any level should not be represented by a union unless you want us to look like Greece. A unions job is to keep the stupid employed.
Paying teachers more is not the solution to improve the schools. You can clearly see, from all your questions, that devising such a system would cause too many problems. The teachers/administrators would waste so much time trying to game the system. The major problem with the school system is the fact that most of the money sent to schools DOES NOT go to the classroom. It goes to other stuff that has zero effect on classroom performance.
The solution to solve this is to move to a voucher system. Allocate public dollars to each student and the student can decide what school to attend. That will introduce a very competitive atmosphere for educating children. The schools that perform best will be rewarded with more students wanting to go to the school. Schools will become more specialized as well. For example, there will be schools that will cater to specific students like the blind, hearing impaired or mentally disabled. All of the waste and bureaucracy will be eliminated. Schools will be forced to deliver the best value or they will simply lose their customers (the students).
In the above system, teachers will be paid what they are worth. A teacher that does not perform well will simply be let go and teachers that perform exceptionally will be rewarded with continued employment, bonuses and other such incentives.
If the "voucher" system was the answer then ALL of Minnesota's schools would be excellent. Voucher systems are not the answer. Minnesota has had statewide open enrollment for 20 years and the bad schools are still bad and the great schools are still great. It has done nothing to improve the bad schools but it has given a lot of kids a choice of where to go to school. The problem is, parents are parents and if you don't care if your kid gets an education in an inner city school you won't care if your kid gets and education in a good suburban school. Those that need to use the program the most, don't take advantage of the program. Until you address the issue of FAMILIES and PARENTS not caring about how their children do in school, schools will not improve. The proof of that is very easy to see-find a good school and you find parents that care, look at a bad school and where are the parents??
The education system has morphed itself into being like the Special Olympics where everyone is a winner, everyone goes to college, everyone is smart. In doing that they've had to dumb down the standards so that the lowest is the goal that can be achievable by all.
I hope one day the think tank that controls all this wake up and realize that some kids are smarter than others. There doesn't have to be one single bar or one single goal to get all these kids into college.
What was wrong with placement tests and kids put in the appropriate class based on those results..social stigma perhaps ? Just seems to me if you put all the higher achieving kids in one class then you have the opportunity to go beyond the normal curriculum and really challenge them while the lower achieving kids all placed in another class can get extra help while not holding back the rest of the class.
But I guess the simple solution is not PC in this day and age.
The education system has morphed itself into being like the Special Olympics where everyone is a winner, everyone goes to college, everyone is smart. In doing that they've had to dumb down the standards so that the lowest is the goal that can be achievable by all.
I hope one day the think tank that controls all this wake up and realize that some kids are smarter than others. There doesn't have to be one single bar or one single goal to get all these kids into college.
What was wrong with placement tests and kids put in the appropriate class based on those results..social stigma perhaps ? Just seems to me if you put all the higher achieving kids in one class then you have the opportunity to go beyond the normal curriculum and really challenge them while the lower achieving kids all placed in another class can get extra help while not holding back the rest of the class.
But I guess the simple solution is not PC in this day and age.
I agree. IMHO, we try to reinvent the wheel constantly in which case, it appears that we throw out good pedagogy for foolishness - only to find out 10 years later, that key concepts are missing, and our kids need to be tutored.
People who have no practical experience in the average school (i.e. politicians who weren't teachers, business execs who weren't ever teachers, and parents who haven't volunteered during class time) should either listen to what those in the trenches daily have to say and then make up their minds, or simply find another bandwagon to jump on. Likewise, teachers who refuse to admit that something that is so obviously not working, need to admit it - regardless of what the administrative consequences are IMO.
Change doesn't happen when we concern ourselves more about our images (and that includes everyone involved) than our kids.
If the "voucher" system was the answer then ALL of Minnesota's schools would be excellent. Voucher systems are not the answer. Minnesota has had statewide open enrollment for 20 years and the bad students are still bad and the great students are still great.
snip
The proof of that is very easy to see-find a good school and you find parents that care, look at a bad school and where are the parents??
Who knows where the parents are but the parents are 100% of the problem but we act as if putting the blame squarely where it belongs is politically incorrect.
I believe the battle is won or lost long before the first day of school so how can we blame teachers?
I raised mine in a house where television was not allowed on school nights with the exception of the 6:30 news or something very special like a Presidential election, attempted assassination of Reagan and that sort of thing. Had to be something special.
The idea of kids in school wasting time watching a moronic sitcom with laugh tracks makes me nauseous. What a horrible waste of time.
My wife would take them to the library nearly every day from the time they were toddlers. All knew how to count, all their letters and some reading before they went to kindergarten. Mom would read to them constantly and they even had some waterproof books they read in the bathtub.
All teachers had my phone number at work, along with my cell phone number, to call anytime if they had a problem. I never got a call because the kids knew the last thing they wanted was for dad to get a call from a teacher reporting behavior problems.
Who shows up at parent teacher conferences? Only the parents that don't need to be there. I am proud to say I never missed a single parent/teacher conference.
Who shows up at parent teacher conferences? Only the parents that don't need to be there. I am proud to say I never missed a single parent/teacher conference.
You are so right..I went to every Open House, Back to School night, parent/teacher conference from K-12 for my son. Being in the same district the same parents showed up over the years. I would say it was a strong showing from K-3 and then started dwindling off. By HS there were just a handful of parents that would show up for Back to School night where you met the teachers and got an understanding of the kids curriculum.
Parents are definitely a part of the problem but I would not say 100%.
There's plenty of blame to pass around on a system that has undergone changes over the years. Educating kids doesn't seem to be the topmost priority anymore IMHO although they say it is.
What was wrong with placement tests and kids put in the appropriate class based on those results..social stigma perhaps ?
But I guess the simple solution is not PC in this day and age.
You're absolutely right. Social stigma was part of the problem, but not all.
Another issue with testing was too many minority kids couldn't make the cut, then cried discrimination.
All together, it brought about lowering test standards to the lowest common denominator.
There's nothing wrong with placement tests. Nothing at all.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
