If you feel Arizona education is poor ... (Chandler, Gilbert: renting, how much)

[Voebe]

And it is:

Arizona education scrapes the bottom ranks in the nation
https://cronkitenews.azpbs.org/2018/...ets-low-grade/

Well, I just found out that the ASU library has eliminated its traditional reference desk - you know, the place where you could seek a librarian to point out the best references for you, or call to get a quick question answered. They are so uninterested in actual interaction that you can now only contact them online. In fact, the ASU switchboard didn't even have their correct telephone number.

[Returning2USA]

Cheap and stupid?

[ringler24]

They gave teachers a "raise" which consisted of increasing class sizes in my kids' school to a ridiculous number. That's not a raise. My 5th grader has 36 kids in his class and the Kindergartens have 29 and we are a highly rated school. Number one way to fail children is to have no cap on class sizes.

[jnojr]

Originally Posted by Voebe

Well, I just found out that the ASU library has eliminated its traditional reference desk - you know, the place where you could seek a librarian to point out the best references for you, or call to get a quick question answered. They are so uninterested in actual interaction that you can now only contact them online. In fact, the ASU switchboard didn't even have their correct telephone number.

It's expensive to have a human being sitting there to answer questions that everyone else is just looking up on the Internet.

[MN-Born-n-Raised]

I haven't been to the library in 15 years. IMO as a country, we have way too many libraries.

[Burkmere]

Originally Posted by MN-Born-n-Raised

I haven't been to the library in 15 years. IMO as a country, we have way too many libraries.

Totally agree. And the way people are educated has totally changed from a couple of decades ago. Once kids can look things up on the Internet I’m sorry but teaching just isn’t as important. Plus it’s a supply and demand thing. Little correlation between teacher salaries and academic performance. True, more affluent school district can pay teachers more but those kids would do well anyway. Parenting is where it’s at.

[john3232]

Originally Posted by Burkmere

Totally agree. And the way people are educated has totally changed from a couple of decades ago. Once kids can look things up on the Internet I’m sorry but teaching just isn’t as important. Plus it’s a supply and demand thing. Little correlation between teacher salaries and academic performance. True, more affluent school district can pay teachers more but those kids would do well anyway. Parenting is where it’s at.

True and many schools in Gilbert and Chandler for example are quite good.

My mother taught in the San Francisco school district for 30 years and when the refugees arrived from Southeast Asia they lived in public housing. They were largely uneducated and spoke no English. However, they understood the importance of education and showed up to parent/teacher conferences to monitor their children progress. Such kids flourished regardless of how poor the overall test scores were in a particular district.

Education almost always begins at home. If it's not valued there's not much a teacher can do as my sister who teaches in the Dallas public school system could tell you.

[JGMotorsport64]

Originally Posted by Voebe

And it is:

Arizona education scrapes the bottom ranks in the nation
https://cronkitenews.azpbs.org/2018/...ets-low-grade/

Well, I just found out that the ASU library has eliminated its traditional reference desk - you know, the place where you could seek a librarian to point out the best references for you, or call to get a quick question answered. They are so uninterested in actual interaction that you can now only contact them online. In fact, the ASU switchboard didn't even have their correct telephone number.

The entire ASU library is cataloged and available online. The building is just a formality these days. You can also live chat if you need something so who needs a reference librarian in person anyway?

And what does that have to do with AZs K-12 woes? ASU is a pretty decent University these days.

[MN-Born-n-Raised]

Originally Posted by Burkmere

Totally agree. And the way people are educated has totally changed from a couple of decades ago. Once kids can look things up on the Internet I’m sorry but teaching just isn’t as important. Plus it’s a supply and demand thing. Little correlation between teacher salaries and academic performance. True, more affluent school district can pay teachers more but those kids would do well anyway. Parenting is where it’s at.

You want motivated teachers. If you underpay a teachers and screw with their wages, they are human and they won't be too motivated. In order to get brighter, more passionate teachers, you need to pay more than AZ wages. So it would be like saying that how much you pay and engineer or mechanic or _________ doesn't correlate to their overall performance.

That all said, the reason you don't see a correlation with teacher salaries and academic performance is because too many kids "coast". As you said, THE #1 reason better test scores happen because it starts at home (expectations, parents who work with their kids at home, etc).

Also, often the highest paid teachers are in districts where teachers don't want to work. As in the hoods. Those are also locations where they spend the highest $$ per pupil. MPLS inner cities for example spend $8K more per student that a good burb (i.e. they spend around $20K per kid). Teacher wages are part of the reasoning BUT they produce terrible results. It's why you will never get an accurate correlation of wages or $$'s spent in the classroom in comparison to performance. Let's agree. If you spend $40K per kid per year, it won't help in the wrong district of kid. You would basically have to hire a new parent to get results. lol

My point is as follows. IF you spend more money on students and more $$ on teachers and IF you have motivated students (a BIG "if"), you will get smarter students. Because the law of economics don't stop working with K-12.

But if I don't toss out the outliers, I can "prove" to you that the more you spend, the worse the results. I would simply compare a catholic private school ($5K per student) versus an inner city school (at $22K per kid) and show you that spending less money gets you better. If I was stupid enough to propose that, you should give me one of these . Therefore, people who want to prove their point that spending more == no better results leave in the MASSIVE outlier called baby-sitting districts that skew the results. An honest debate should be only spend more when families or students prove they are trying; else it is a waste.

All I can say is I'm glad I sent our kids to a district that was well funded full of motivated teachers. So while 35% didn't pass minimum standards, our kids were in the top tier of performers on a national level. I'm convinced going to a well funded district for our family helped. To tie it into the thread, our kids never went to the library. That's old school.

[Justabystander]

Originally Posted by MN-Born-n-Raised

I haven't been to the library in 15 years. IMO as a country, we have way too many libraries.

God, I am glad that you are not my parent growing up. Libraries are still an area of adventure and discovery, and while there is the internet, there is a world of books which helps with reading comprehension, Libraries in the Midwest and East thrive; education has a place and libraries aid in that education.