I believe that japanese teachers are VERY highly paid and as such many good graduates want to work in schools.
If you can standardise burgers and such why not schools ?
Find the best school in America and copy it.
RE: supply and demand.
You pay enough to recruit and retain staff, otherwise no one applies or they all end up leaving.
Oddly enough, i know a few people whose parents are teachers who told there kids NOT to go into teaching due to lousy pay and conditions. go figure
Its all about monitoring / incentive really.
A friend of mine went to a private boarding school where the children are really pushed in there work and hence do well in the exams.
The reason for this is plain and simple, if the school produces bad exam results ( all the private schools have a ranking, as now do state schools in the UK, oh yes, name and shame ! ) then no one will send there kids there and it will close.
If a USA government school produces bad exam results nothing happens ?
Over here in the Uk they now produce league tables ( published in the paper ) of schools and send inspectors into the worst ones AND throw money at it.
These ‘bad’ schools do improve so you can’t say its just the area or the kids because otherwise they would not improve.
If your serious about improving schooling then i think you need the following.
A published league table showing school performance ( name and shame).
A taskforce that goes into the worst ones to try and do ‘all possible’ action.
Invite the heads of education from good performing countries ( japan ? ) and ask there advice !
Or to be frank why the hell don’t the education department just ask the head teachers from the best schools what they are doing wrong !!!
Problem numero uno with this line of comparision.
No federal (USA) schools. Local school board control generally, and most decision making never goes beyond the State level.
However, otherwise, good thought.
Added comment in re public versus private:
(a) Salaries. May be hard to make comparisions. (i) salaries will vary by region in both private and public sector (ii) costs will vary by region. One has to be careful here.
(b) Quality/Duties: simplistic comparisions with private schooling fail because public schools have to accept all-commers. Private schools are more selective. Even less selective ones may suffer a form of selection bias in re students insofar as more motivated students/parents may actively seek out private schooling. This may, stress on may, create illusion of benefits of private schooling which may actually derive from other sources.
Observation: class size seems to count.
Observation: How its spent, as noted above counts quite a lot too. I recall from my NYC days the horror of that bureacracy, which eats up a large % of each education dollar. Intelligent, stress on intelligent, bureacracy reduction would clearly help in many circumstances.
I think it would be great if paying teachers more money would create competition for teaching jobs and create a climate in which teachers were compelled to excel.
My kids (public school) have had some very good teachers, some OK ones, and sadly, some pretty lousy ones.
We’ve laughed (but also have been frustrated) about teachers that are completely lost without their book and answer key…don’t dare ask a question!
Our Athletic Director is paid around 80K. I’ve always wondered about that.
In order to be able to pay teachers a higher salary, the money has to be there. Often, a big source of school funding is property taxes or special income taxes…and when various tax levies and renewal levies are on the ballot, the older folks whose kids are finished with public schooling often aren’t motivated to maintain or increase their level of taxes.
So if we were to throw money at the problem, we’d first have to decide where that money is coming from. Then assuming we can solve that problem, I’d want to know that the crappy teachers are being weeded out.
You have to monitor to find the good teachers and reward them while firing the bad ones.
Unfortunately education has a ‘hide it’ culture instead of a 'lets be open and fix it ’ one.
If you made the headmaster of a school have his pay linked to school performance he would do it for you !
Oddly enough, another myth created by the Republicans is: “The only way to improve the military is to throw money at it.”
Priorities, people. Priorities.
No, throwing money at a problem is not the only answer, but it sure helps. This sudden love of Welfare programs (i.e., vouchers) which would take money out of Public schools. How about we initiate a program where we take money out of the Military to fund those who want Military training but want to go to a private Militia and not the Army.
Here’s a link to a AFT salary survey from 1998.
http://www.aft.org/research/survey/
The opinions are, of course, biased. But I’d think that the figures are most likely correct.
Teachers are paid quite a bit less than other professions. Less even than blue collar me, although I do work a lot harder than they do. 
Maybe school districts need an outside oversight committee to observe where the money goes, and to report this to the taxpayers.
I’ve studied the voucher ideas, and I just don’t think that’s an answer.
More money and better control would work wonders, in my opinion.
Peace,
mangeorge
Twenty years ago my great uncle worked for whatever the national department of education was called in those days. His task was to evaluate the multitude of new and special programs that were being developed. The idea was that those progams that “worked” would be federally funded and made available to any school system that wanted those programs or something along those lines.
He said that every new program increased skills and test scores, the first, second, and third year the program was in use. The problem was that after that the skills and test scores were just “normal.”
Eventually they figured out that when a new project started everyone was excited about it, everyone was learning to use it and teachers checked with other teachers about this and that; principals observed and praised, asked questions, showed interest. After three years the “new” program was old hat and keen interest that kept the program “pumped up” was gone, and so were the higher scores.
The lesson learned, according to my great uncle was that we need to change textbooks, programs, grades teachers teach, and whatever can be changed every three years.
So, I think it has to be more than throwing money at our schools and teachers, but also some way of encouraging change, interest, and that “pumped up” environment.
Jois
Oh, my. Let’s get some facts here, all right?
Teachers are not substantially underpaid. They used to be, most of a generation ago, but teacher salaries were raised, pretty much across the board, in the '80s. The idea that teachers are systematically underpaid is now a myth.
Some hard numbers from this page (using figures from 95-96):
Teachers in all 50 states and the District of Columbia make more than the average worker’s wage, ranging from a high of 65.2% above in Pennsylvania to only 2.9% above in DC. (Of course, the average salary in DC is seriously skewed by the government – DC actually ranks quite high on pure salaries paid to teachers.) Now, some teachers might think that they deserve to make as much as a doctor or a lawyer (I’ve heard that arguement made seriously), but it’s clear that teachers aren’t “badly paid.”
And from this official report from the Labor Department, we see that “Teachers” actually have the highest total hourly compensation of the occupational groups included (presumably this includes more-highly paid college professors as well as the primary and secondary teachers this discussion is primarily about).
Also, to bring up a fact which I haven’t seen mentioned, teachers generally work only 186 days a year. That either means they have the most generous vacation plan in the world, or that they’re working not-quite-full time. (The first site, above, includes information about teachers’ other sources of income.)
So my question, to turn the OP on it’s head, is that, since we clearly are “throwing money” at the problem (look at this page – another part of the first survey from above – and notice how much money the big urban districts are spending), why isn’t it working?
First question that comes to mind – who declared that an “average worker’s wage” is a proper yardstick for evaluating teachers’ salaries? After all, that average presumably includes lots of low-income blue-collar salaries; should teachers’ salaries really be judged against that? Or should we look at (say) average white-collar salaries and see how teachers stack up against that? Especially since teachers are supposed to be (IIRC) college-educated and certified.
(Just looking at the starting salaries for teachers on that page, I can declare I’d never want to get into teaching because it pays way too little. I made considerably more than any of those starting teachers back when I first got into the job market, and I suspect I’m not the only one)
Does that include the unpaid hours used by teachers on evenings and weekends on grading exams, supervising after-school activities, and other supplimentary efforts? Or are we assuming that all of the teachers get everything done from 8:00am to 3:00pm?
I’m not disputing the figures being presented; I just think the assumpions being made about the context of those figures are incorrect…
mangeorge wrote
Frankly, I was speaking from anecdotal evidence, namely from past conversations I’ve had with my mother (a public school teacher) and other people who I know that are public or private teachers. They’ve all universally told me this.
I just looked out on Google (searched for teacher salaries “public school” “private school”). Of the pages I found that were relevant, I found a number that indicated that public teachers made more. I found none that indicated the other way. Granted this isn’t the most solid research, but there it is. Here are a few of the results:
http://www.ohiou.edu/news/99-00/204.html
Ohio University news item which contains the quote
http://nces.ed.gov/pubs/ppsp/97455-2.html
The US Department of Education, which contains these average salaries for principals:
http://www.ag.org/acts/perspectives/200012_morale.cfm
Association of Christian Teachers (granted, a biased view), includes this:
http://209.207.229.18/research/reports/private/caholic/table3.htm
American Federation of Teachers (Teachers Union), clearly biased in the other direction, contains this:
http://teachers.net/mentors/private/topic1229/1.20.01.16.15.14.html
a teachers chatboard which contains this message:
rjung wrote
Absolutely correct. The proper yardstick is of course the great God of Supply and Demand, who sets the value of everyone from Basketball Great to Jr. Janitor.
And the God of S&D has spoken clearly and declared that all is well.
Regardless of the salaries, there are other issues involved:
FOR RELEASE: 13 MARCH 2001 AT 00:01 ET US
Economic & Social Research Council
http://www.esrc.ac.uk/
Girls adapt to the new world of work while boys still lag behind
While girls are focusing more on their futures and are prepared to study hard, boys are still adopting anti-work ‘laddish’ attitudes which hold back their educational development, according to new ESRC-funded research.
Are the kids in UK any different from those in the USA or Canada?
Jois
Boys who slack at school leave and only find shit jobs while the girls drive past in there new flash cars laughing.
It all balances out in the end.
One odd side effect of this ‘girls working, boys slacking’ is that lots of girls are now walking about saying ‘why can’t i find a boyfriend with a decent job !’.
You can either complain about high tax or you can complain about bad public schools, what do you want ?
To go back to the original thread - THROWING MONEY AT IT WOULD IMPROVE IT !!!.
If some of the smart dudes who did the B1 stealth bomber were doing school organisation ( with a similiar budget ) then they would be cutting edge wouldn’t they !!!
Then again, does it matter.
Failing schools but booming economy, high employment, living standards rising… does it matter ?
In my old school district there was something similar going on. In the county middle-school program, there was a lot of unnessasary spending going on. Very pointless and mundane things were being purchased to “help the schools” but in actuality people just thought that buying more useless things was going to help problems much deeper than that. Here’s another thing. This may ot may not be related, but I think it is interesting. The principle at my old school drove a BMW Z3 for 2 years. These are not cheapo cars. Then, this year, he traded that in for a M Roadster, a much more expensive car. Now, tell me this. Are principles actually making enough to be paying in excess of $1000 a month for the insurance, Luxury Taxes and car lease or payment?..or should I suspect money-laundering?
Although teacher salaries are an issue, it’s not just money that is the problem. Now, I don’t have any cites for what I’m about to say, but I do have the experience of actual teachers, which IMHO count even more than what scholars have published. If you disagree, so be it. Just try to hear me out.
My mother taught in public schools for 40+ years and is now retired. She says even if she wanted to (she does not), she won’t go back to teaching in the public schools no matter how much $$ she’s offered for two reasons:
1.) “Parents do not discipline their children at home and hold them accountable for learning; therefore, it’s much more difficult to discipline them in school. They are not taught morals, respect for their elders, or responsibility.”
2.) “School administrators do not support teachers.”
I would add two more things:
1.) Administrators and educational scholars do not consult teachers–the very ones who are most familiar with the learning problems students face–on what the best ways for teaching students should be. Educational practices like tracking students into emotionally disturbed, below average, average, and gifted and talented classes, just set kids up to fail.
2.) Parents do not know about what their or their kids rights are. For example, many parents do not know that if their kid who is labelled Emotionally Disturbed is not re-evaluated and if found to be no longer Emotionally Disturbed and therefore removed from Emotionally Disturbed classes by 10th grade, then said kid may not graduate with a diploma, only a Certificate of Completion. Knowing that you have to option of having your kid re-evaluated is something that administrators probably do not stress and parents take little time to found out about. I think a case on the Emotionally Disturbed thing came up in California a few years ago. A parent sued the educational system. But it’s little things like this that contribute to the problem of failing schools.
[sigh]
School teachers are so divided by red tape–filling out forms, attending meetings, dealing with disruptive students in class, that they have little time to teach. It is not a teacher’s province to be secretary, disciplinarian, counselor, entertainer, or anything else besides someone who teaches x subject matter. Why then are these additional burdens heaped on them? Hell if I know. An acquaintance of mine taught high school for a few years before he decided to go to graduate school and get out of teaching on a secondary level altogether. He really tried to teach history on the high school level, but the principal met his efforts with little support. He was made to understand that his PRIMARY goal was to keep the students quiet and in the classroom by assigning busy work. In the classroom next door to him, the teacher regularly cried because she couldn’t control the students who were disrespectful to her and disruptive in general. Let’s just say that there weren’t very many opportunities for learning going on in her classroom either.
Why do school principals or administrators not support teachers? Hell if I know. I think maybe because they do not teach students and therefore have no conception of how to give teachers effective strategies to deal with students, whether they be discipline problems or not. The burnout rate for new teachers in particular is so high because the new teachers get assigned most of the problem classes that no one wants to teach, and as my mother asserts, there is no effort to have more experienced teachers mentor the newer ones and give them strategies to deal with problem classes.
Okay, I’ve talked a little bit about the practice in some public high schools, let’s talk about the education major classes on the college level. Many of the classes deal with child development and other pedagogicial theories, but at the expense of ensuring that education majors have sufficient content knowledge as well. I think this is especially the case for math and science teachers. Disturbing. While child development(the different ways children can and do process information) and pedagogical theories (e.g. using group work vs. lecturing) are useful, they are textbook cases and do not in any way prepare teachers to deal with the discipline realities they will face in the classroom. I think that college secondary education majors should spend more than one semester in the classroom working with experienced teachers so that they can learn how to control their classrooms.
I could go on, but I’m really getting too angry as I write this, and I need to cool down. Have fun with what I’ve said.
Just one final thing:
Turbo Dog said:
“. . . I personally think that computers have no place in schools, at least in any class below grade 11. Computers can be learned in secondary school. Primary focus of elementary school and high school should be basics. . . . This should be continued in another thread. I would like to hear from teachers actually, to see if maybe I’m just too old fashioned already.”
Yes! Yes! Yes! I would welcome this thread on computers in the classroom. Turbo, you’re not being old fashioned. Students do not need the distraction of computers in the classroom until they’ve learned the basics, although I do think that they should learn foreign languages beginning in elementary school. They need to learn how to spell, do arithmetic, do research w/o the aid of a computer–that means going to the library and if necessary consulting a reference librarian. Why students are afraid to ask for help from reference librarians still puzzles me exceeding! But I digress. Get that thread started.
Celestina’s post is almost too on target. A recent college graduate, all certified and prepared to teach grade school, told me that as she started practice teaching the first thing the two classroom teachers asked was, what had they taught her about discipline. My friend said nothing, never had a class, lecture or even off the cuff remarks about discipline. They’d been waiting for help from her.
Sadly some long ago studies have shown that the student teacher continues to use the methods of discipline that he or she observed during practice teaching.
Celestina said: “Why do school principals or administrators not support teachers? Hell if I know. I think maybe because they do not teach students and therefore have no conception of how to give teachers effective strategies to deal with students, whether they be discipline problems or not. The burnout rate for new teachers in particular is so high because the new teachers get assigned most of the problem classes that no one wants to teach, and as my mother asserts, there is no effort to have more experienced teachers mentor the newer ones and give them strategies to deal with problem classes.”
All that jives with what I have observed. Even doing something as simple as joining two classrooms and having a more experienced teacher pair with a new teacher.
I know most of us wish for a practical “fix” at a higher level that would correct the ploblems at the classroom or school level and there just is no such thing.
Jois
Sadly, the biggest part of the problem with public schools is that the American public and parents generally look at them and at teachers in particular as babysitters. It’s the place where we send our kids to get them out of our hair.
Jois, thank you for supporting what I said. Yes, there are no quick fixes for the mess of public school education, but I think we and parents in particular need to start to look at:
1.) what actually does go on in schools
2.) what parents/American public define schools to do
3.) what schools NEED to do
As things are practiced, I think there is some misunderstanding about #s 1, 2, & 3 and we’re not going to fix the problem until we reassess these at the very least.
The thing that surprises and dismays me the most is that as far as I can tell, the public education system does not have any effective means of assessing its success in meeting its goal of preparing students to be competent citizens. Standardized tests are not an effective means of assessing school or student performance because all they test is how well a student took a particular test on a given day. And certainly saying that if a failing school is still failing after x number of years, the government will pull funding from it altogether and provide students vouchers to other more successful schools is NOT the way to go either. That’s ridiculous, for it doesn’t address the problem at all; it doesn’t support teachers; nor does it provide any specific protocol on how a failing school can improve its performance within a set frame of time. Different factors contribute to different schools in determining successful performance, and it may take some schools longer to fix the problem than the x number of years specified.
What I find MOST DISTURBING of all is the current movement to re-segregate the schools. And parents are just sitting back letting this happen! I just don’t understand how a parent could not be involved in his/her child’s educational growth, and I don’t see how minority parents in particular can just sit back and allow their children to be reassigned to predominantly minority schools, which are located in areas that have a low tax base and which do not receive nearly as much funding as those schools that are located in communities where the tax base is higher. How could minority parents in particular just sit back and watch history repeat itself. We are regressing into a similar Jim Crow dynamic that Brown vs. the Board of Ed. sought to eradicate.
As far as observing teachers as a means of assessment goes, if a teacher is having trouble controlling a class and/or teaching the subject matter well, then what support programs are in place to help the teacher improve and how effective are they? To say that a teacher will not get a pay raise or will be fired for his/her class’ poor performance on a standardized test is ridiculous and certainly does not help solve the problem. The current proposed quick fixes–throwing $$ in the form of school vouchers or rewarding teachers with raises for high class performance on standardized tests is IMO an example of politicians–who don’t have a clue about the realities/logistics of the public educational system as it operates now–trying to act like they have viable solutions when they don’t.
Ooohh!! And don’t get me started on the problems with the curriculum . . .