Paying for Better Math and Science Teachers 660
Coryoth writes "While California is suffering from critical shortage of mathematics and science teachers, Kentucky is considering two bills that would give explicit financial incentives to math and science students and teachers. The first bill would provide cash incentives to schools to run AP math and science classes, and cash scholarships to students who did well on AP math and science exams. The second bill provides salary bumps for any teachers with degrees in math or science, or who score well in teacher-certification tests in math, chemistry and physics. Is such differentiated pay the right way to attract science graduates who can make much more in industry, or is it simply going to breed discontent among teachers?"
We have a winner! (Score:4, Insightful)
Ding-ding-ding-ding-ding!
Teacher shortage? (Score:5, Insightful)
Either that, or enslave post-grads for a few years and FORCE them to work at public school wages. That'll work... Yeah.I hate "IS/OR" questions like this. The answer to both is YES. Pay which is competative with industry will attract science grads to teach. It will also cause "discontent among teachers" who somehow feel that all teachers should earn the same -- regardless of education/demand for certain skillsets.
Queue the teachers union to strike/protest.
if it breeds discontent, so be it. (Score:5, Insightful)
This proposed system to get better math and science educators and educations sounds like a meritocracy approach, which may be a foreign concept to some in the heavily union-controlled teacher community. It would seem that something as important as the education of our children the most important goal would be to fund and organize the most effective educational system possible.
While I don't know the intricacies of the teachers' unions, I've had enough discussions with my sister, a teacher, to suspect the best interests of the children are rarely in play in decsions around who should teach and how much those who teach should be paid. If this is really true, it is probably the wrong approach.
A central tenet of the school pay system appears to be their main stumbling block: FTA:
There's a certain insanity to the notion that different demand-disciplines (in the market workplace) should not help guide salary distribution in the teaching systems. High-demand, high-pay disciplines should drive high-pay teaching positions. If an English teacher's 50% cut to a Physics teacher's pay bothers the English teacher, he (she) need only get the necessary background to qualify to teach physics. It seems like a simple equation... it's kind of (not exactly) how it works in the job market.
I'm all for a meritocracy for teachers, and not just in the math and sciences. Unfortunately, from past observations, as long as government runs educational systems, and unions govern teacher selection, the "finest education" for the children is likely the last result we'll see.
Want to place odds on whether Kentucky pulls off getting these bills passed? And, if passed, want to double down on the teachers' unions' resistance? That said, good luck to Kentucky... I hope they pull it off.
Re:if it breeds discontent, so be it. (Score:4, Insightful)
Stupid end-of-summary questions (Score:2, Insightful)
Why can't it be both?
Simple logic (Score:5, Insightful)
Only in America (Score:4, Insightful)
We already spend a shit load of money on education and the results are poor at best. So what do we do? Spend more money of course! I think the US needs to look at other cultures to see how its done. We're obviously missing something and it definitely isn't money.
gasmonso http://religiousfreaks.com/ [religiousfreaks.com]Re:We have a winner! (Score:2, Insightful)
Teachers work their asses off and mould students to be the leaders of tomorrow. Isn't that worth more than a pittance?
As someone who is self-taught in computers (now a *nix Systems Admin), I loathed Math in HS because I saw little point to it. I was never explained 'why' math can be interesting, and it hurt me when i wanted to take CS a few years after I graduated.
Anyways, point being: there isn't enough youthful motivation in school, and nor are the teachers compensated for their efforts enough, so huzzah to anything that trys to change that. Even if it does nothing 'practical' or immediate, it at least gains some exposure to the situation.
Maybe all teachers deserve higher pay... (Score:2, Insightful)
More competitive pay may attract science grads who could make more elsewhere, but I'd argue that it's worthwhile to avoid breeding discontent by giving all teachers that same raise. They certainly deserve it for all the extra hours a teacher puts in grading, preparing lessons, and other "homework." Counting all that, my teacher friends put in more hours in a nine-month school year than I do in a twelve-month sysadmin's year, but they make half the money. Besides, if extra money will improve the applicant pool for science teachers, won't it do the same for english or history teachers too?
Re:We have a winner! (Score:5, Insightful)
or is it simply going to breed discontent among under-qualified teachers?
Fixed it.
Why I'm Not a Teacher (Score:5, Insightful)
I'd like to be a teacher. Some of the greatest influences on my life have been teachers. I like teaching kids science and computers, and I've got a talent for it.
But I'll never be a teacher under current systems.
I'm not patient with kids who don't get it and insist on me walking them through everything. None of my favorite teachers were either. I'm not respectful of authority either, unless it's earned that respect. None of my favorite teachers were either. And if parents insist that little Taylor or Brittany didn't earn the C they got on the test, I'll tell them where they can shove their complaints. And I'm not about to waste my time teaching kids for a test. Some of the best lessons in life can't be tested. I'd reward kids for creativity, an inquisitive nature, the questioning of current thinking, and for making me look dumb. All the kinds of things my favorite teachers rewarded me for.
I feel that, in this current climate, I wouldn't last a year as that kind of teacher. In fact, two of my favorite teachers got fired after I had them because of complaints and friction with the administration. And they were replaced with robots designed to make more robots. Indeed, most of the teachers I remember fondly only lasted as long as they did because they produced results despite friction with the administration and parents.
Re:if it breeds discontent, so be it. (Score:5, Insightful)
That's a stumbling block of *all* unionized workplaces. Instead of paying people based on their performance they pay everyone based on their years in.
This type of reward system creates an environment that's filled with indifference. "Why should I work hard and come up with new and exciting lesson plans when I'm going to be paid exactly the same as Bob Smith who sits on his tenured ass and doesn't engage the students at all?"
It's a real problem where I used to work and it was compounded with supervisors that have limited budgets and individuals used to receiving their yearly raises and not looking for upward advancement. So you have people that do nothing more than the bare minimum, don't have any goals, and are just happy to be great at making themselves look busier than they really are while complaining that Joe is working hard and making them look bad.
Re:Let's get this out of the way (Score:4, Insightful)
And who judges performance?
If it's the school administration, then you risk the principal's favorites getting paid just because they're the favorites.
If it's based on standardized tests, then you just get teachers teaching kids how to take standardized tests, which is ultimately results in a lousier education.
Re:Here is a thought (Score:5, Insightful)
There is an unhealthy stigma that goes along with people not going to college, and I disagree with it. College, while wonderful for some, is not good for others. 2 year trade schools, or apprenticeships should be encouraged far more than they are. And this is relevant to the topic because the students are told by their teachers that if they don't go to college, they will be useless to society. (or at least thats how I was taught)
There is a problem with the teaching system in the United States, and it starts with the students being far too empowered. If little Johnny does something wrong, teacher (rightly!) punishes Johnny, he cries to Mommy, and Mommy sides with Johnny. Teacher's hands are tied and so they stop caring. I have plenty of friends that are teachers, and this is a common story. There are more problems, but I firmly believe that the problem originates at discipline.
AP students (Score:3, Insightful)
The first thing that needs to happen is that AP classes need to not be dumbed down to the lowest common denominator because of political reasons, and everyone shouldn't get a pony- we have to get back to having kids *lose* if they don't make the cut.
Re:We have a winner! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Why a bias for science teachers ? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:if it breeds discontent, so be it. (Score:4, Insightful)
Teachers get rated based on how their students do on standardized tests, so they teach students to be good at the test, regardless of how relevant that information is outside of the test. People complain about teaching to the test, but insist on metrics that require some manner of measurement. It's a catch 22.
This is even worse since the teachers get no choice in their students. How would you feel if your performance was based on your ability to get a bunch of goldfish to do math?
I'm all for rating people based on their performance, but in practice it always comes down to something documented clearly in such a brain dead manner that people aren't afraid of being sued. Once that happens, it becomes very difficult to see the difference between someone who is really good at their job and someone who is good at gaming the system.
Re:Teacher shortage? (Score:3, Insightful)
Wow, spoken exactly like someone who's never set foot in a classroom. It would be hard for you to be any more wrong than you are here, buddy. The problem with the teaching profession today is precisely that we have too many under-competent teachers faking their way through subjects they neither understand nor enjoy. I can say this, though: If you think that math is just about getting the "right answer", then I am glad you're not in the classroom. That sort of thinking is damaging.
Re:Let's get this out of the way (Score:1, Insightful)
And who judges performance?
If it's the school administration, then you risk the principal's favorites getting paid just because they're the favorites.
Welcome to the working world!
Who judges performance? Your manager.
Can mangers play favorites resulting in unfair compensation? Absolutely.
Can metrics be put in place to minimize this possibility? Certainly.
Will management then monkey with the metrics to do whatever they want (usually minimize everyone's compensation)?
Does a bear shit in the woods?
These problems aren't unique to education, but the rest of us seem to find a reasonable compromise.
Unions (Score:2, Insightful)
And part of the problem are teacher's unions. Most force a system were all new teachers are paid the same, with the same tenure requirements and the same raise/bonus requirements. There is little if no incentive to become a teacher of "hard" subjects like math and science when you can get the same salary and job security in one of the "soft" subjects like social science, art, music or gym. This is why most schools have a glut of "soft" subject teachers and why there are so many bad math and science teachers.
What happens is the shortage of math and science teachers forces the school to make a "soft" subject teacher teach those subjects. They end up doing a terrible job because they aren't trained in it, don't have an excitement about the subject and generally feel that they will only being doing the job temporarily. This maybe the case but only because they are sacked (not likely given our tenure system) or quit when they reach a certain level of dissatisfaction. Otherwise a school is stuck with a crappy math or science teacher until they retire.
If the research was done I bet a good causal relationship of bad math and science teachers and lower student interest/performance in those subjects could be made. Getting rid of the ridiculous parts of the union system and creating a Milwaukee, WI style school choice program will go a long way to better teachers, better schools and students that will be able to compete globally again.
Re:We have a winner! (Score:5, Insightful)
Professors have to be paid based on the opportunity cost decisions they must make and as such people like phyiscs professors, economics professors, law professors, etc make a lot more money than english, classics, history type professors. This may not seem fair since they both do the same sort of work, teaching classes possibly consisting of the exact same students but you have to think about their other options. A physics professor could make good money in industry instead of teaching and similarily the opportunity cost of a law professor teaching is being a lawyer and the cost to an econ professor of teaching is the possibility of making a ton of money in business/consulting. If you are going get qualified professors in these fields, you are going to have to pay them a wage closer to what they could earn outside of acadamia.
The only reason I see this not being a valid case for high school teachers is that there is a bigger qualification gap. I feel fairly confident that given a curriculum (and I guess the education credits needed to qualify me to do so) I could teach science or algebra to a bunch of 16 year olds or show them how to construct a thesis but I am in no way qualified to be a college professor which would require me to possess a PhD in my field (which usually assumes a masters) and extensive time investment before being granted a real professorship. As a matter of fact, I remember being taught courses in high school by instructers who clearly had not studied the subject they were teaching...
Thus I see why the pay-gap is a legitimate idea but it probobly doesnt apply well enough to high school teachers (who dont necessarily have the qualifications to make the opportunity cost argument valid)
Re:Only in America (Score:2, Insightful)
The problem is that we are not applying our money is the right areas. Here in the US we educate EVERYONE until they are 18 (or actually 21 if you need it). That means we pay a ton of money for even the dumb people, and even mentally handicapped. While they too are deserving an education, in Europe they seperate students at an early age. By getting the dumb kids out of the classrooms the bright students can be challenged. But here in the US we believe that everyone should get the same education and students are all basically mixed together until the middle of high school.
Im sure Im not the only /.er who wanted to shoot myself when the teacher had kids read books out loud, and I had already finished the whole damn book while some kid was still stumbling through the first page. I remember spacing out during math and science class for years while they taught and retaught things I learned in the previous grade. And private school was really not an option for me because my parents didnt have an abundance of money at the time and would not have been able to save for college for me.
I believe the core of the problem is that students are not seperated like they are in Europe. If we took the money we waste on teaching kids english lit when all they really need to learn from high school is how to weld, and applied it for classrooms and teachers to challenge the college bound students from a very early age, it would go a long way towards improving our test scores.
Re:We have a winner! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Could it be much worse? (Score:3, Insightful)
It is enough to discourage people who have degrees in their fields from entering teaching. Why would I want to sacrifice at least a few years of very good pay just to qualify to become eligible to teach in the field I already have a degree in?
(In MA, at least, you need a teaching certification which requires extra schooling in education to get. Don't know what the rule is in other states.)
Re:Teacher shortage? (Score:5, Insightful)
You need to keep in mind that teachers do not work 40+ hours/week and they get the summers off. Pay rate would be better expressed in dollars per hour. My wife is an English teacher (a damn good one too!) and I'm a sofware engineer. My yearly salary is more than twice hers, but if you count the hours (counting 50hrs/week for me) she gets better pay per hour.
You get (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Why I'm Not a Teacher (Score:1, Insightful)
I like teaching kids science and computers, and I've got a talent for it.
I'm not patient with kids who
You have a "talent" for teaching kids who think like you, respond like you, and like the kind of things you like? Hoo boy, you better bottle that ta-lent. I hate to tell you, but the whole "talent" thing in teaching comes from dealing with each student as they are and leaving them better than you found them.
Any jackass could teach little clones of themselves.
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Why I'm Not a Teacher (Score:5, Insightful)
Good thing you are not a teacher. What you are saying that you could do that job only when it's easy. Anyone can.
Being able to control, teach and inspire kids that are not at all interested in the subject is something that a great teacher can do. That's where the art of teaching comes in.
I taught computer programming adults who were quite motivated to learn. This was a piece of case. My wife teaches engilish to 7th graders in an urban school. After few months all her students love her and many learn to love literature. Teaching in that environment is a completely different skill.
Of course it will (Score:2, Insightful)
It will blow up into a big ol' envy-fest
The teachers' unions will make sure of that.
Re:if it breeds discontent, so be it. (Score:3, Insightful)
Why are we debating a 5-year-plan? (Score:4, Insightful)
That Kentucky (or any state in the U.S.) applies the same logic to education is no surprise, but why do Slashdotters acquiesce to determining teachers' salary by central planning and government mandate? The free market should determine teachers' salaries. The prerequisite, of course, would be to eliminate government-run schools and let private schools compete for tuition money from parents.
Yes, I am one of the tens of thousands of signatories to the Proclamation for the Separation of School and State [schoolandstate.org]
Re:We have a winner! (Score:3, Insightful)
Teaching is not the main purpose of the professors. And it's nothing new - I learned about it 35 years ago.
I work for Public Education (Score:5, Insightful)
I've seen good and bad teachers in the schools I work in, and quite frankly, there aren't enough good teachers. Period. Like the teacher who was teaching life lessons from the master "Rikki Lake" (No kidding). Or the Social Science Teacher teaching made up crap and opinions as "fact". Or the Math teacher who didn't know the formula for the area of a circle (No kidding), Or the teacher that has four computers on his desk and that is all he does all day, instead of teaching the special education kids in his charge, or
It is pretty scary stuff, if you ask me. The scariest part is that NONE of the teachers I mentioned could be fired, because the Union says so. It is clear that the Union doesn't really care about their profession, or it would be EMBARRASSED of many of its members.
I feel really sorry about those teachers that are actually good. However, they cannot overcome the crap coming from the worst of them. Sad, but true.
Re:We have a winner! (Score:2, Insightful)
Teachers are not teachers anymore, they are babysitters.This sentence was not only relavent to the issue in the article, but is characteristic of so many of the problems with our education system right now from parents expecting schools to raise their kids and teach them values to our failing grades compared with the rest of the world. I don't think that its just the bureaucracy of structured classes, but with the teachers' lack of ability to control a classroom. Of course, that's a whole other can of worms.
Re:Teacher shortage? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Here is a thought (Score:3, Insightful)
WHAT?
You have no idea what you are talking about at all. Period. Whatsoever.
Do you know why we have so many problems with youth acting out in this country? Because we treat them like animals, utterly undeserving of respect. Then we wonder why we don't get any back from them and call them little bastards and the like.
In school, I was a troublemaker because I was bored. You see, the American school system was designed to create factory workers and it has never actually been revamped since. The #1 "skill" they want you to learn is how to sit still, be quiet, and go unnoticed. You are trained to be a cog in a machine. You have an assigned seat, into which you are placed. This is the axle upon which your cog is mounted. You have an assigned curriculum, which is delivered to all children equally, whether it is far above or far below their abilities. Of course, in order to make this work with standardized testing, it has been dumbed down so that practically any student will pass. This makes the dumb students feel good about themselves, which helps them learn. It makes the smart students bored, and makes them feel like everything is easy, so they don't have to try hard any more. So we fail to bring out the potential in some students in order to help others limp along.
Am I proposing that we leave those students completely behind? Absolutely not. But the time when we should have realized that teaching all students as if they were the same simply does not work has long since come and gone. Some students will never achieve much in English, while some will never do well in math. Why should we seek to make them all identical? Perhaps we should simply accept that some people are better-suited to certain careers than others. And perhaps - although this is a bit of a stretch in any capitalistic society - perhaps we should be placing less emphasis on the career and more on actual happiness! Maybe if we put less importance on the trappings of society we'd have less anorexics, less burnouts, less of everything bad.
But basically, we do everything wrong in education. We go so far as to teach people the scientific method, and to regard science as important, and then utterly ignore many of the fruits of science. Studies have shown that waking teenagers up in the early morning actively retards their development, but we don't move junior high and high school starting times later in the day. We know through testing that students do their best under broad-spectrum incandescents and sunlight, the latter being the best of course, but instead of taking advantage of this knowledge we continue to put them under old-school, flickery fluorescents. We put computers in classrooms and then instead of using computers intelligently and teaching childen about logic and the world through them, we get a smug sense of self-satisfaction when we teach them to touch-type. Who can say but that we might already all be using direct neural interfaces if instead of teaching children to sit in rows and tap the same sequences of keys, we had been teaching them to expand their minds and explore their world?
No, my friend, the problem is not that students are too empowered. The problem is that we treat them like cattle. The problem lies not with them, but with us. And the problem is not one of discipline, but respect. You can "discipline" your children all you like but the only discipline it will teach them is to not get caught. If you instead treated your children with respect, they would learn to treat you the same, and you could enter a working relationship with them. Instead we expect them to obey our orders like dogs.
Or put another way, Respect works both ways. Fear only goes in one.
Sorry, I don't babysit (Score:5, Insightful)
At least in her classes, the students were apathetic and disrespectful. In her assessment, basically zero learning occurred.
Contrast that to what I get when I teach my kids at home. We snuggle up and read a homeschooling book about astronomy, and they actually learn. We pop in a "Magic Schoolbus" DVD rental, and even I learn stuff about human physiology, etc. My 6 year old knows multiplication table up through 7's, and reads at a 3rd-grade level.
Seeing the heartbreaking gap between what most kids can learn, and what most kids do learn in public school, keeps me from ever wanting to perpetuate that environment. I'm considering working with small groups of kids and possibly even doing some math teaching to home-schooled kids. But public schools - no way. It's mostly a waste.
Re:We have a winner! (Score:2, Insightful)
First off- scoial studies. Do you think this happens in a vaccuum? You read the book. You write papers/answers to what you read. THis builds off your reading and writing skills, and allows you practice at practical applications. With the right questions, it also builds critical thinking skills (questions that ask you to read motives, rather than repeat the text). And do you really not want students to be taught to read and study current events and history until 4th grade or later? Thats idiotic.
Science is similar, and its a perfect place to drop math into as well. Not to mention- do you really want to have 10 year olds completely oblivious to basic science? If you wait until they're halfway through school to introduce it, its too late to impart a love of learning, and the philosophy of science. I know my school taught the scientific method in Kindergarden, and it was probably the most important thing I ever learned. I shudder to think how my mind would have evolved without that.
Re:We have a winner! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:We have a winner! (Score:3, Insightful)
Not really. One Masters degree is not equal to a another. There are far too many incompetents walking around with advanced degrees from education programs to compare them with real degrees. It has always been a truism that "Those who can't do, Teach." but it has never been more true than in today's government schools, only the incompetents who can't hack it anywhere else enter the system or stay in the profession for long. Paying them more would only be throwing good money after bad, because paying the same dullards, morons, union hacks and disillisioned folk hoping to hang in to retirement more would change nothing. And unless you could double the pay few competent people would be willing to endure the mind numbing brainwashing required to get the teaching certficate required to enter the profession.
Fact: At least 50% of current degreed teachers have a practical level of skill below the official 'high school' education level. They may know more than 50% of what gets passed out of the government schools with a diploma every year but that is a different story.
Fact: A Doctorate in Math, Science or History is insufficient credentials to teach a High School course in the subject. Unless one is willing to endure years of brain numbing courses in 'teaching' the unions won't allow you to teach in government schools. Which all but ensures that only the mindless will be teaching. No amount of money can change that.
Fact: Unlike most degreed professions, teaching is unionized. This means that unlike other professions, teachers must be regarded as interchangable cogs; merit pay is violently opposed for example. This means market based reforms can't be tried. Add in tenure and change is impossible. Tenure was an idea intended to protect those in academic settings who might espouse controversial ideas or want to publish research the mainstream might find objectionable. For scholars who needed the academic freedom to follow their research wherever the facts or their conscience lead them without fear of being sacked. K12 teachers do not publish new research and often aren't even permitted to design their own lesson plans without oversight. Why the hell do they get tenure?
No, the only solution is to end the government schools and try again in the private sector. That also has potential problems but we already know how horrible the government's attempt turned out.
Competition is a bitch! (Score:3, Insightful)
An arts degree does not set you up for any useful function beyond teaching. They can pay art teachers squat and the only competition comes from McDonalds burger-flipping jobs.
A degreed scientist/math person has far better prospects and the schools will have to compete to attract them.
Re:We have a winner! (Score:3, Insightful)
Teachers actually make more per hour than most (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:We have a winner! (Score:3, Insightful)
An easy way to answer that question... (Score:4, Insightful)
Just look at the supply of teachers - are there enough qualified applicants for an open position at the salary you are offering? If I were an administrator, I would want at least twenty serious applications for a position, of which I could interview five or six and then pick the one who fit best. Are schools getting this many serious applicants?
In most cases, yes. In some cases, they are getting far more applicants than is necessary, indicating that the salary offered is too high. A suburban school posting a job for an elementary position in any decent district will be flooded with applications, normally hundreds and sometimes exceeding a thousand. On the other hand, there are not enough qualified math, science, and special education teachers, as well as teachers willing to teach in troubled rural or urban schools. It is clear from this that any employer besides a public school would cut the pay of elementary teachers and boost the pay of math teachers until qualified people for both positions could be found.
The reason I am not a secondary science teacher today is the poor pay. I make twice as much working as a researcher at a major corporation, and have a job that shuts off at 5pm each day without all the headaches. On the other hand, few elementary or English teachers could make double their teachers' pay. Indeed, few of them could even match it in the private sector.
Colleges and universities do not pay all professors the same. They know how to do it, and prove it can be done. Public schools need to move beyond the silly "all teachers are equal" mindset they have been stuck in for decades. It is killing education.
Fat, Dumb and Religious is no way to go... (Score:3, Insightful)
*shrug*
They can always join the military! With Lil'Bush making noise about Iran, we'll have a deep need for people to die in the desert for Haliburton and Exxon!
(only partially serious)
Not so fast... (Score:5, Insightful)
Being knowledgeable and being a good teacher are 2 completely different things. How do I know?
Glad you asked,
I'm a PhD student in Mech. Engineering at a top 10 school working through the NSF GK-12 Fellowship program and putting in 30hrs/week at a local school. Believe me when I tell you that being smart and being a good teacher at that level are 2 completely different things and I've been decorated and distinguished as a TA from our undergrads and the department. Middle/High School is a different ball game ENTIRELY.
I've learned to keep my mouth shut when it comes to criticizing our educational system - my advise, donate your time to a local school and you'll quickly learn why you love your job so much. It's dang hard work with very little reward other than the smiles on their faces.
This was after a 3 week (50hr/week) summer intensive course on education - there are education theories out there that make a lot of sense and work. You wouldn't know this because the vast majority of my teachers haven't followed them. There is more to being a good educator then being smart in your field - it requires being knowledgeable in the theories of education also.
That said, I find that the teachers at my school to be extremely petty (maybe it's a catfighting thing) but the politics are horrible and the acknowledgements are nonexistent.
What have I learned? I love my field
Re:We have a winner! (Score:2, Insightful)
He reminded the other dinner guests what they say about teachers: "Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach." To stress his point he said to another guest; "You're a teacher, Bonnie. Be honest. What do you make?"
Bonnie, who had a reputation for honesty and frankness replied, "You want to know what I make? (She paused for a second, then began...) "Well, I make kids work harder than they ever thought they could. I make a C+ feel like the Congressional Medal of Honor. I make kids sit through 40 minutes of class time when their parents can't make them sit for 5 without an I Pod, Game Cube or movie rental...
You want to know what I make?" (She paused again and looked at each and every person at the table.)
I make kids wonder.
I make them question.
I make them criticize.
I make them apologize and mean it.
I make them have respect and take responsibility for their actions.
I teach them to write and then I make them write.
I make them read, read, read.
I make them show all their work in math.
I make my students from other countries learn everything they need to know in English while preserving their unique cultural identity.
I make my classroom a place where all my students feel safe.
I make my students stand to say the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag, because we live in the United States of America.
Finally, I make them understand that if they use the gifts they were given, work hard, and follow their hearts, they can succeed in life.
(Bonnie paused one last time and then continued.) "Then, when people try to judge me by what I make, I can hold my head up high and pay no attention because they are ignorant...
You want to know what I make?
I MAKE A DIFFERENCE. What do you make?"
THIS IS WORTH SENDING TO EVERY TEACHER YOU KNOW.
(And everyone on your mailing list, for that matter).
THERE IS MUCH TRUTH IN THIS STATEMENT:
"Teachers make every other profession."
Re:We have a winner! (Score:1, Insightful)
But don't worry! Before long, No Child Left Behind will ensure that every public school student makes an average grade on their tests, so that the next year, they can improve a few points and prove to the world that they got edumacated that year. Of course, public AP and honors classes will be a thing of the past as well.
Absolutely (Score:3, Insightful)
But really, the problem with education isn't pay-grade differences. It's actually a situation where liberals and conservatives have both come together to fuck things up. The conservatives offer Christian fundamentalist parents to put pressure on school boards to teach creationism or similar frauds, uneducated morons sitting on education boards to decide what is and isn't science and a ridiculous philosophy that free-market capitalism actually applies to education in the form of "No Child Left Behind". Oh yeah, and they have a worrisome trust for standardized test scores as a benchmark for performance.
The liberals, on the other hand, offer hideously overpowered teacher's unions that keep shitty teachers employed, an inane attitude that no kid should ever fail and an unreasonable expectation that every kid should go to college. Really, when did becoming a plumber or electrician become something so terrible? You can make a good, honest living doing plenty of trade jobs. But not every kid belongs in college, and filling colleges with kids who don't belong there sucks resources from actual higher education and diverts it to joke majors like "park and recreation management". And since every kid has to go to college now, they have to have enough majors for everyone!
Re:We have a winner! (Score:2, Insightful)
I won't spend the time to counter all of your points above, as I don't think it would help. I would ask though for you to read the fine print of the law. There are a lot of things in it that don't make sense.
If you notice, I never said, I didn't want to be held accountable. I think accountability is paramount to teaching all students, but No Child Left Behind puts accountability only on the schools. There are no repercussions for a student who doesn't come to school, nor a parent who doesn't encourage education. Before you say I don't care about those kids, let me remind you, I spend all day teaching them. I work extremely hard to make sure they learn, but to expect every student, regardless of IQ, desire to learn, and time in school is ridiculous. I think we should teach all children, but it is really fair to expect a school, who has only two years with a student who transferred in to teach that student everything he or she missed for their entire life? Remember, No Child Left Behind says EVERY student should pass the test, and the example student I use above would qualify.
At the end of the day, it's about balance and equity in the system. We've reached a point in the United States where teachers are the only ones being held responsible for the issues we have with our students, yet we only see them for eight hours a day. At some point, do we ever expect a child and their parents to be responsible, at least in part, for their own education?
And with all the finger pointing above, tell me, what have you done for those kids? Do you volunteer at your local school? Do you mentor a child? Do you support those teachers you are so quick to dismiss in any way? Or are you only good at pointing out the negatives in a flawed system without any attempt to help it work?
Re:Absolutely (Score:3, Insightful)
Economics comes a 2nd. How else do we explain trillion-dollar deficits, $200 hammers and toilet covers, and Hedge fund losses like LTCM [wikipedia.org] and the rest?
If our students have a good grasp of maths and economics, they can get this economy under control in no time.
History should be 3rd to make sure they don't do a Bernie Ebbers or Jack Grubman.
Re:I work for Public Education (Score:3, Insightful)
Never. But you are the one calling for *more* government oversight. So you agree it is bad, then ask for more of it. With logic like that, I can see how you are so easily confused.