patrick.net

marcus says

OR is it our awesome huge salaries that are ripping off the tax payer?

It's the awesone teacher pensions, health benefits, and small class sizes that are ripping off the taxpayers. Tha salary's really not so much.

Small class sizes? Really? I guess you have not been reading the statistics lately.

marcus says

I would suggest that you maybe find a good job, before leaving your current one, for starters. It's a very tough time to be starting in teaching, because there have been a lot of lay offs recently. You are going to be competing with experienced people out there, that is in your job search.

Yep, understand Marcus and thanks for the advice. Luckily, I have supported my wife while she has finished her School Psychology degree and finalizes licensing. So, this happens quickly or slowly depending on when she can find employment. We understand that education is usually the first cut in a fiscally constrained environment. Getting her practicum and internship proved exceedingly difficult this last year due to massive budget cuts in education.

We have been very frugal with our money, so we can make it quite a while without a paycheck. I am looking at job satisfaction and want to join another profession. I see teachers as professionals in their area of expertise. I have some concern if teachers are truly treated like professionals anymore. I am using the word professional in the truest sense. It would bother me if I started this profession and was not treated as a professional in a field of study. If that is true, then we really know where the problem lies in the education system.

I was looking at teaching H.S. Math or Science. My BA is in Liberal Arts with a Certificate in Math and a Certificate in Natural Sciences. My 18 year profession is Environmental Sciences and these Praxis II tests are easy areas for me; Biology and General Science, Earth and Space Science, Environmental Education, and General Science. I would have to refresh on Calculus for the Mathematics test. Praxis 1 does not look difficult.

I also have military training in fundamental instructional techniques, curriculum development, tests and measures, and leadership (obvious).

marcus says

(I don't really think the term "passive aggressive" applies. This is aggressive. I'm not going to apologize for finding you to be narrow minded, and racist ("invaders"), and in your own not so subtle way, an asshole.)

lmao .. you are tooo much my angry little friend. Rise above the fear and anger, you can do it! One question though, exactly what race do you connect to "invader"? I only ask because I am far from a racists, or sexist, or anythingist ... keeping track of those things is more of a liberal minded thing, in my opinion.

And since you refuse to not call names; I know you are, but what am I?

Truthplease says

I also have military training in fundamental instructional techniques, curriculum development, tests and measures, and leadership (obvious).

just wanted to re-produce the word "fundamental" so as to show how basic ideals sure can be a good thing. (just funning w/Sim here - no offense)

@truth,
I too am looking at teaching, but in my case it's at a vocational center. I think I'll do better with older teens and young adults, mainly due to my limited vocabulary when curse words are removed, and lack of patients for undisciplined children raised by idiots. The center is funded by tax dollars and puts low-income/welfare people to the front of the line. The teaching/trainer position pays $0 per month, but I want to help folks that are in a bad spot and are willing to help themselves. A few evenings a week aint that big of a deal to give up, in my opinion.

Some of you on here bashing teachers and our education. What are your solutions? You have to consider that teaching is more of a monopoly market. Some of you are expressing your opinions to teacher's salaries and benifits as if your opinion was the market. Should we privatize teaching? That would be great for teachers! Let's apply free market principles to education, then teachers would earn 150K salaries.

If not, then why are you bashing teachers pay and compensation as if it was your own? Sounds very socialist to me.

Why the attack on teachers? How about we play a game. You tell me what your profession is, and I will give you my opinion that you are overpaid and underperforming. Or better yet, I buy your product, you tell me how much you make, and then I will use my sole opinion to determine the market instead of the market itself.

Only a socialist would claim someone else’s pay as their own when another has freely exchanged their labor for pay.

The government mandates education. Plain and simple. You want to get rid of the union, Fine! Let's apply free market principles to education. Education is now privatized, poof! How about I start an education company called Edu-Mart, then I tap into highly educated pools of people overseas, I bring them in to teach your kids at a fraction of the cost. Or better yet, Edu-Mart will just ship your kids to china and educate them there. That would be great for this country!

Don't want to do that, okay then, I am big government now. You find a school to educate your kids and you pay for it. However, every year Uncle Sam is going to test your kids. If your kid doesn't pass, I will fine you a hefty penalty. I don't care if you can't afford to pay the tuition for these well performing privately run schools, too bad! Sucks to be poor.

Wouldn't that be a nice free market education system that just neglects the lower class and further locks is in a social caste system.

Edit: This is more of a rant open rant as I was thinking, but will keep it posted to see if there are any better ideas.

vouchers

In order to get a teaching job in today's environment, you have to be certified in math or science, certified in special education, AND bilingual. And have a masters. There are simply no teaching jobs so districts can have high standards.

Sweden has vouchers but schools can't charge more than the voucher.

This is important, since without that hard limit vouchers just become a price support and the cost will be jacked up to what the parents can afford + the voucher.

Also, the more difficult students cost the most money to educate. Vouchers become a way to cherry-pick all the good students and dump the rest god-knows-where.

Public schools are a foundational element of a meritocratic all-in-it-together society. The intermixing of social classes is critical.

Private schools are centrifugal, divisive, and a terrible long-run mistake. But that's where we're going, because making long-run mistakes is something this nation is becoming really good at.

Troy says

Public schools are a foundational element of a meritocratic all-in-it-together society. The intermixing of social classes is critical.

Agree completely.

if that's the case -- how do you feel about the reduced use of english in California? I mean, if public schooling is soooooooo great, where do you place American culture and lingo?? Where do you place church and family -- both are mainstays of an all-in-it-together society too aint they? The fabric of any sociey is commonality .... conservatively speaking. And speaking of that, when you suggest that all members of a society are responsible to behave in a manner that is best for the society, that means you are suggesting we toss out all deviant behavior .. as deviant behavior flies in the face of all-in-it-together meritocracticness. Right?

One other question, who sayd "intermixing of social classes in critical"? Who looks at students with regard to social class and why in the world would that make any difference as to how they learn or what it costs to teach them? I do not agree with having any policey that acknowledges social class. Who is in charge of assigning the class to each person?

Reduced use of English, it is an absolute disservice to only teach one language in school. You are also setting kids up for failure if you don't teach English.

Church is not in public education. Family yes.

The fabric of American society is not commonality. American Society is diversity.

Yes, deviant behavior as in crimes or disobedience, do not punish disabilities.

Who looks at students in regard to social class? Ever heard of the reduced lunch program. You need to recognize there are social class differences. Some kids need a bus, some kids get dropped off at school in their parent's Lexus.

What it costs to teach them? I would believe poor kids are harder to teach because of social issues. Do you realize there are kids out there that only get a decent meal when they go to school? Yeah, let's keep ignoring the poor. Don't worry little Johnny, I know your tummy hurts because your broke, but keep coloring in the lines and try not to pass out.

Bap, it sounds like you have an axe to grind in your community or your past about one individual that was paid well to do very little. I guess you will be the first one who steps up and volunteers to put the Latino kids on a train back to Mexico, cuts school lunch programs, and reduces our school system to a have and have not program.

zzyzzx says

It's the awesone teacher pensions, health benefits, and small class sizes that are ripping off the taxpayers. Tha salary's really not so much.

Pension contributions are taken out of my salary. If you looked up my salary, the amount you would see is before subtraction of my pension contribution. The state also contributes. It's just like social security (and in place of social security (FICA). The difference being that the money goes in to an actual fund. And the payout is a little better than social security. But it's not a fair comparison, beause you can get full social security for many less years paying in, and social security pays disability and other benefits that are different from a simple formula based pension.

I started late, so won't do that well with it anyway.

MY average class size was about 45 this past year.

As I said earlier, California is 43rd in spending per student.

EMan says

Carma has a way of catching up with fraudsters.

I'm assuming you were referring to karma ?

Okay, but truth occasionally prevails as well. Combine ignorant thinking with lazy thinking and you get Eman, a person who never backs up his wacky assertions.

Cool, it's magic. He say's it's true, without even really the detail for anyone to comprehend what he's saying (he hasn't even thought it through that far), and poof, abracadabra it is magically true ! And by magic not only is it true, but people will magically now understand the details of what he was saying too.

Bap33 says

how do you feel about the reduced use of english in California?

as long as the 3rd generation speaks English natively, I don't give a shit.

I was an immigrant to Japan so I know how much nicer it is for immigrants to speak their own language in their adopted country.

Coming back here was always something of a relief to be able to function above the level of a retard in daily society. And my Japanese wasn't that bad.

that means you are suggesting we toss out all deviant behavior .. as deviant behavior flies in the face of all-in-it-together meritocracticness. Right?

No, the true problem here is all the judgmental, holier-than-thou pricks deciding they can tell other people how to live their lives.

If it doesn't harm you, laissez faire.

marcus says

Eman, a person who never backs up his wacky assertions.

Robert Rizo is in jail by now and so is the entire city council of the city of Bell for stealing public funds for personal use.

City of Montobello is under investigation from FBI because they misappropriated HUD funds.

Thats just how you government officials in big places work, they steal from the poor to provide themselves a lavish lifestyle.

EMan says

Thats just how you government officials in big places work, they steal from the poor to provide themselves a lavish lifestyle.

I know the story, can you give me the detailed breakdown of what that has to do with teachers and their union? Where's the fraud ? Where's the corruption. Can you find it. I know you're real sure it's there, BUT CAN YOU FIND EVEN A HINT OF IT?

Keep in mind, even the highest officials in the union are paid on the teachers pay scale which is public knowledge. It tops out at about 72K, but and goes a little higher slowly, but you can only get there with a huge amount of additional classes, that are not paid for by the employer.

Troy says

as long as the 3rd generation speaks English natively, I don't give a shit

Really, anyone who is here and going to school here before the age of 9 or so, is 98% guaranteed to make English their first language and to speak it with zero accent. But their parents, extended family or neighbors might still use Spanish a lot, in which case they have the pleasure of being totally bilingual, which I personally am envious of.

I know of educated latino parents who intentionally bring their children up speaking English and Spanish (even way before school) because they wish their kids to be bilingual like they are. How can you not respect that?

We are used to being so isolated. I doubt any European can even imagine such a ridiculous conversation.

English is securely in place as our primary language.

EMan says

Thats just how you government officials in big places work, they steal from the poor to provide themselves a lavish lifestyle.

I don't know Marcus, but I believe that I can say with absolute certainty that he isn't stealing from the poor to provide a lavish lifestyle for himself.

I can go you one better: Teachers aren't "government officials." They are often government employees - but then again, so are janitors, IT people, office staff, etc. Some of these people might have better job protections due to their affiliation with a union - but they're far from being influential people with the power you described.

Bap33 says

how do you feel about the reduced use of english in California? I mean, if public schooling is soooooooo great, where do you place American culture and lingo??

If you're asking me, I'd be thrilled to see better use of the English language amongst the posters on this forum. But that wasn't your point... I believe that you were attempting to link "American culture & lingo" with the English language. We don't have a national language (we have so many other "national" designations, but not a language), so I'm more than a bit curious as to what your perceived reduced use of English in California might have to do with the downfall of our American Culture.

I also found it ironic that you were complaining about the ramifications of the reduced use of English on our culture by using a Spanish word. Seriously, Bap - if you can't use the King's English, with words that are only rooted in Anglo-Saxon language, you negate your argument.

The English language itself evolved out of many different languages. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_English_language

Bap33 says

And speaking of that, when you suggest that all members of a society are responsible to behave in a manner that is best for the society, that means you are suggesting we toss out all deviant behavior .. as deviant behavior flies in the face of all-in-it-together meritocracticness. Right?

Unless it's a society of S&M freaks. Kinda blows your theory all to hell, huh? And "meritocracticness?" Wow.

elliemae says

I don't know Marcus, but I believe that I can say with absolute certainty that he isn't stealing from the poor to provide a lavish lifestyle for himself.

Teachers in CA for most part are complacent and lazy. I've been to these schools. Their union has done it all to lower quality of education.

EMan says

Teachers in CA for most part are complacent and lazy

He's trying to come up with something. You have no idea Chris. It's a burnout job, where one never feels they are doing enough, even if they work 70 hours a week. Especially when there are 45 students in each class.

EMan says

Their union has done it all to lower quality of education.

We get that you want that to be true, and that that is all you need for something to be true for you, but it's easy to argue opposite. Pay and benefits would probably be worse without the unions. I know that you fancy yourself as someone who understands markets and economics. Are you saying that if teachers pay and benefits were worse, that somehow higher quality people would be attracted to the profession ?

We aren't hired by buddies in the union. We are hired by Principals, who choose the best applicant. And then there is the evaluation process by which someone becomes permanent.

marcus says

We get that you want that to be true, and that that is all you need for something to be true for you, but it's easy to argue opposite. Pay and benefits would probably be worse without the unions. I know that you fancy yourself as someone who understands markets and economics. Are you saying that if teachers pay and benefits were worse, that somehow higher quality people would be attracted to the profession ?

I would say that the system enshrined by law is devoid of many positive free market influences, and is hindered by too much union monopolization from reaching the ultimate goal of delivering the highest-quality education at an affordable price.

In that context, I'm no fan of treating all teachers as equals primarily by credentials and tenure. I've experienced exceptional teachers in public schools, and horrible teachers. The former should have been paid above what they were being paid, and rewarded for their ability to replicate what works by becoming teachers who lead / groom other teachers. The latter should have been fired, but were tenured and protected.

I've also been extremely fortunate to have had one year of private high school. I can tell you that across the board these teachers were all like the best teachers I experienced in the public schools. Moreover, few of them were officially certified to teach in the public schools. Two who I consider the best were young, brilliant, and fairly recently out of college, and exceptionally motivating with their passion for the subjects being taught. It is universally understood that private schools pay less than government run schools.

All that said, wages are a bit of a distraction from the deeper systematic problems of the U.S. school system in general, which by and large are one-sized-fits-all centers bureaucratically forced into a state-neutered mediocrity and structured primarily to meet the lowest common denominator of regional and national political-education demands, offend the fewest residents possible, while satisfying to the greatest extent possible the demands of local organized labor so to meet the political aspirations of politicians at all levels. Operating in this framework of institutionalized mediocrity, the discussion of wages is, well... facile.

To entertain it, nonetheless, pay for teachers should be market determined just the same as in any other industry. But so, too, should the structure of education, vs. the system currently fossilized into place by state mandate. Education could be innovative, purposeful, and dramatically more effective in meeting real world demand if freed from the shackles of mediocrity. In such an environment, the most effective and entrepreneurial educators at delivering an end-product that satisfies the consumers' desire for purposefully educated children at an affordable price would win out. That would mean the best in education (in its new, highly varied and innovative form) world would attract most of the revenue, and therein the teachers who were most effective at delivering a quality education would be rewarded the most. Those less effective would work for less much like any other industry where experience and quality pay the most, and those that suck would be washed out of the system into a career more suitable to their abilities / efforts.

marcus says

We aren't hired by buddies in the union. We are hired by Principals, who choose the best applicant. And then there is the evaluation process by which someone becomes permanent.

No doubt, that the way it works. But principals are handcuffed within / are the byproduct of a severely shackled system.

marcus says

It's a burnout job, where one never feels they are doing enough, even if they work 70 hours a week. Especially when there are 45 students in each class.

I can only imagine the frustrations.

And in the "worst" school districts, teachers are expected to accomplish miracles with students whose parents have zero involvement, with many teenage students being warehoused by law who are not the least bit cooperative / interested in being educated. Systematically, this comes at the expense of the truly reachable students / involved parents.

The system, as is, does not solve this problem. Throwing money at the problem seems to have only made it worse.

As a related tangent, I ran the numbers here in Pittsburgh once, where the cost per student was $13000 back then, and the average class size was at about 30. At $390k per classroom, that's a lot of coin especially when the average teacher was only getting about $80k-$90k of that (when adding all benefits to wages). IMO, too much coin is being wasted. (One area was in the janitorial department, where janitors were working the union contract so that they could load up on overtime, and where some were making 6 figures for cleaning the school. I'm all for a fair wage... but Houston, we have a problem.)

Although, I guess to tie this back to my initial point... What's the point of blowing cash on a large part of the student population that wants nothing to do with working along with the system?

More to the point, what's the best incentive to get kids to embrace education? The current system is a failure for all who attend only until the point at which they immediately (are allowed to) drop out.

Ronnie Honduras says

More to the point, what's the best incentive to get kids to embrace education?

A visible goal at the end of the process.

Troy says

A visible goal at the end of the process.

10 points for vagueness! Such as?

Implies defining a value proposition that can be embraced. Wealth and value are very relative concepts. Hard time envisioning a universal that resonates.

Ronnie Honduras says

10 points for vagueness!

you're one to fucking talk.

Such as?

a j-o-b.

Troy says

you're one to fucking talk.

Ok, I was being a bit of smart ass... (not intending to be an ahole to you, though... sorry if it came across as such.) But in my defense... you kinda threw out an uber-broad, nine word statement open to a myriad of interpretations...

As for my vagueness, I covered a ton of ground -- I kinda kept it broad to hit a wide variety of issues. What detail can I provide?

"a j-o-b"

Boy, you like to keep me guessing. (Is this a game? Ok: We've knocked out kingdom. And now genus... How about species? )

Seriously -- can you please elaborate? I seriously doubt you mean the status-quo, carrot / stick arrangement (Jobs best to worst = Advanced Degree > College Diploma > HS diploma > drop out)... works for some, passable for others, fails many.

or Are you talking about guaranteeing them a job? Or do you mean changing the system to direct towards specific jobs? Really, a creative imagination can frame"a j-o-b" in a dozen plausible interpretations.

Or you can shoot a quick-triggered, one word, smart-ass comment back at me again.

If a diploma is economically worthless then I can see why young people don't put any effort into their education.

The entire structure of K-12 needs to be changed, probably.

People in general have a problem deferring gratification, putting them in generally failing educational pipelines to nowhere is part of the problem.

Japan has the same problem with their educational systems to nowhere.

I don't have any other over-arching thoughts on this.

marcus says

We aren't hired by buddies in the union. We are hired by Principals, who choose the best applicant. And then there is the evaluation process by which someone becomes permanent.

Yes, but the union protects bad teachers from being fired. I said above, good teachers should be paid far more than union scale. Crappy teachers should get canned.

Teachers being unionized (and given tenure) has two chief problems:
1) a ceiling on pay, which means good performance isn't adequately rewarded -- which encourages mediocre performance
2) it protects the worst members, at great expense to the best -- which doesn't disincentivize poor performance

Troy says

If a diploma is economically worthless then I can see why young people don't put any effort into their education.

The entire structure of K-12 needs to be changed, probably.

People in general have a problem deferring gratification, putting them in generally failing educational pipelines to nowhere is part of the problem.

Amen.

My current thinking is we need to consider how education naturally evolved for thousands of years before the modern system, the origins of which were designed to send a compliant, consumer-oriented work force to the big business workplace / factories.

In the old day you began learning about being a productive citizen as a young teen, your education was first hand apprenticeships, where you learned about delivering quality to an end consumer. Here you learned from other adults how the world worked, and the rewards of honest work. Something like that adds more relevance to education, IMO. Today, kids are warehoused out of the real world, and taught by people whose entire careers are confined to academia which is always segregated from the outside economy. I'd rather see education tied more organically into the functioning economy vs. being it's own entity, IMO often divorced from that reality. It's uber-boring for all but the 15% of kids wired for excelling in academic format education. Most kids grow to be experts at managing indifference to education and the highly irrelevant (and semi dysfunctional) social dynamic game among their peers. Many bright kids merely play the curve to cope.

Better were more kids integrated in society through apprenticeships and productive education via local businesses, etc. However, sooo many barriers exist to small business development these days that big biz dominates the landscape / has an unfair legislated advantage, which means those sorts of opportunities are gone. Also, labor laws prevent kids from deriving value from their abilities until they reach 16, when they're now supposed to go work for big corporate fast food.

corntrollio says

Yes, but the union protects bad teachers from being fired. I said above, good teachers should be paid far more than union scale.

True, but this is a greatly exaggerated issue, and more so all the time, as districts constantly get better at getting rid of bad teachers. The stories you hear are exceptions. Even without unions, there would surely be a few bad teachers, who are well connected or who contribute in other ways to the school (excellent coaches for example), and are kept for those reasons in spite of marginal teaching.

Troy says

If a diploma is economically worthless then I can see why young people don't put any effort into their education.

The hard part is motivating them around the ages 0f 9 - 14. Not that the very early years, and staying on track then isn't also important. If they develop some decent habits, reading, and doing key work and practice, then by the time they are in about 10th grade, when college hits their radar, they then know that the degree is not worthless.

There is still PLENTY of financial aid available to students from financially strapped families, if they just do at least above average in school. And they will by then be learning the differences that a college degree will likely make in their future earnings.

I'm not even talking about those students who truly excel, for whom full scholarships are available to the very best private schools. I know that you guys aren't questioning that.

Ronnie Honduras says

The system, as is, does not solve this problem. Throwing money at the problem seems to have only made it worse.

Wrong, although it is true that too much gets wasted on consultants and high level bureaucrats. The truth is that too little is now spent, at least in my district. People don't want to pay for education, they just want to whine about it.

That's really what all of ChrisLa/Eman's crazy anti-union rants are about. His beliefs allow him to argue against paying for education. It's not unlike the way that believing we are still paying taxes so high that even lowering taxes from these levels will increase revenue to the government. That's very convenient belief, since that belief goes happens to be that we should have more money.

Who doesn't want to have more money? Hey, let's believe what ever we want to believe if it fits our own personal self interest.

marcus says

True, but this is a greatly exaggerated issue, and more so all the time, as districts constantly get better at getting rid of bad teachers. The stories you hear are exceptions. Even without unions, there would surely be a few bad teachers, who are well connected or who contribute in other ways to the school (excellent coaches for example), and are kept for those reasons in spite of marginal teaching.

From my experience this isn't the case. And whenever there are budget cuts because economy is crashing the entire union goes up in arms if they have to take pay cuts because they are special and better than everyone else. Taxpayers aren't the once who support the idea of teaching children of illegal immigrants, while increasing class sizes and dumbing everything down to lowest common denominator. It's the unions who get paid for attendance, not for education.

I've seen people that graduated high school with no ability to do basic arithmetic. I think now there are some federally mandated tests being rolled out to prevent that, but thats how it was for a long time because unions wanted to pass everyone just to make their education look better on paper. To much extend that crap still happens. This isn't public service, this is an abuse of the public.

EMan says

From my experience

The only basis for any Eman argument

EMan says

And whenever there are budget cuts because economy is crashing the entire union goes up in arms if they have to take pay cuts because they are special and better than everyone else.

Total 100% made up bullshit as usual. I can show you the multiple cuts we have taken since 2008. Can you show me the so called "up in arms." I think what you refer to was mostly fighting actual lay offs and class size increases. Why is it that you make up all of this bs ?
EMan says

To much extend that crap still happens. This isn't public service, this is an abuse of the public.

Could you please maybe just one out of 20 times document or show some evidence to back up your made up bs. By the way, I still say that you are on public aid. There is no way that a guy making any kind of a decent living would rail against schools the way you do. I get that your schools let you down. Sorry, if you had some bad teachers, or if you blame them for your terrible performance in school. You should have worked harder. Sometimes, when students have the kind of learning handicaps you obviously have, it takes extra help. If you had asked the right people, I'm sure they would have been happy to help you.

Still, I am very sorry that you had such scarring experiences in school.

marcus those little passive aggressives aren't going to prove your point. rat is still a rat.

marcus says

There is no way that a guy making any kind of a decent living would rail against schools the way you do.

lol .. care to back up some of your bs with evidence?? lmao.

You have no logical reason for us to continue to over-pay for crappy schools other than "that's how we do it, so it must be right." I'd like to see some competition for the tax dollars between private and public, and then we'll see. Ofcourse, we will need to watch over the public teachers to make sure they are not getting together to change test scores, or other liberal ways of gaming the results like that. WHere is the outrage Lord Master?

Bap33 says

You have no logical reason for us to continue to over-pay for crappy schools other than "that's how we do it, so it must be right."

But where's the proof that public schools are generally crappy ?

The annual Gallup poll about education shows that Americans are overwhelmingly dissatisfied with the quality of the nation’s schools, but 77 percent of public school parents award their own child’s public school a grade of A or B, the highest level of approval since the question was first asked in 1985.

I have toyed with the idea of teaching in a private school. Because then it would just be about the Math (minimal behavior distractions), with class sizes maybe as low as 15 ! That would be so nice. I would have to take a bit of a pay cut probably, but with 1/3 the students per class, and students who all want to learn and do well, it might be worth it.

But I'm in a decent school in a middle class area, where it's not too bad. Usually just one or two of my 5 classes are super difficult in terms of managing behavior.

The fact is, more than anything, what makes a bad school bad, is "bad students." When parents send their kids to a private school, its because of who the other students are. Generally the other students are children who at a minimum know their parents are paying 15 to 20K per year for this. That affects their attitude. It makes teaching FAR EASIER.

By bad students, I mean students who are not fed well, maybe have bad dysfunctional or criminal influences, or are depressed because of their poverty. MAybe even they are in a neighborhood where trying and caring about school gets you beaten up, for being so "uncool."

It's also true that the reason the very best colleges are so desired is because of who the competing students are. It's not because of the professors. Many undergrad classes at Harvard for example are taught by grad students.

I have thought a lot about vouchers and the charter school idea. The attraction for me to vouchers, is it makes school another consumer item, and increases awareness that it's worth something. This could over time improve the attitude of students. Motivating more kids to want to do well.

Here's the downside: Similar to republican proposals for what people under 55 would get in place of medicare, over time it would get to where good schools would cost a premium. Parents in lessor neighborhoods would send their kids to schools where the cost is voucher plus (some premium maybe a few thousand per year or more). Now, in these neighborhoods, the students left who will going to the default free public school, that is for those who can't swing the better private school, are left with a really bad option.

What you think of as competition, would be competition for the best students (the ones willing to pay a little more), and in turn for the best teachers. Like now, but worse. The default public schools in these areas then become even far far worse than they are now. With a very high percentage of unmotivated uncooperative children (far worse than now).

Hopefully you've considered what I'm saying here enough to understand it. If not, maybe others will get a little insight. Often things aren't quite as simple as they seem.

marcus says

What you think of as competition, would be competition for the best students (the ones willing to pay a little more), and in turn for the best teachers. Like now, but worse. The default public schools in these areas then become even far far worse than they are now. With a very high percentage of unmotivated uncooperative children (far worse than now).

Sir, in the quote above you wrapped up the entire issue. As with most liberal actions, the plan for public school is the spread the pain evenly and bring all areas to the lowest common denominator. You actually said that having any option other than the current public option would (likely) result in only the crappy students and teachers being left in the public school system. Marcus, my dear sweet friend, we finally agree 100% on something. The only trouble is, I would rather see the possibility for greatness to be achieved by those willing to do what it takes that do not have the funds, so vouchers (with the checks and balances that Troy pointed out) would be good. You seem to be willing to hold back the best and brightest to spread the misery - and while that is common in the liberal mind-set, it just does not seem like a teacher would have that frame-of-mind. You give your fellow teachers more credit than they deserve. How do you know that they have the same heart and soul to do their job with desire and purpose. When we read the way Sim describes how his dad did his job there is no doubt, none, that his fellow teachers knew he was special. I bet Sim's dad could tell when a fellow teacher had the heart for the job or not, and I bet you can too. Wouldn't you love the chance to shine as bright as you can, in a class room full of kids that were supported from home, or personally motivated, ready to work as hard as you want them to at gaining some knowledge? I know you would. But, just as you correctly pointed out, opening up the distribution of tax-dollars for parents to find schools that offer things like discipline, and Bible based education, and strict behavior guidelines, and no tollerance for anti-social, anti-American, anti-productive behavior ... would result in the public schools being left with teachers that could not cut it under the spotlight, teaching THE SAME KIDS THAT ARE MESSING UP SCHOOL NOW FOR EVERYONE ELSE THAT IS FORCED TO ATTEND. Allowing bad students to stay in school is just as bad as allowing bad teachers.

Anyways, I am glad we found a common agreement point. Have a great day. Support vouchers.

Bap33 says

You actually said that having any option other than the current public option would (likely) result in only the crappy students and teachers being left in the public school system.

You have to read more carefully. I was only talking about the terrible low socioeconomic areas, where public schools are already bad.

In good areas, like where I teach, where people move or cheat to get their kids in because it's such a great public school, it would be more or less the same after vouchers were instituted, because we are already competitive. Then again, it's hard to know for sure that private schools wouldn't spring up to siphon off many of our best students.

There are pieces of this very complicated puzzle that you don't get.

Truthplease says

Troy says

Public schools are a foundational element of a meritocratic all-in-it-together society. The intermixing of social classes is critical.

Agree completely.

Just try to understand, before looking to justify your point of view. I agree with the following too.

Bap33 says

Allowing bad students to stay in school is just as bad as allowing bad teachers.

Really ? It's their fault ? Let's say a kids dad was shot, and he was so distraught that he's now a few years behind. Maybe he's surly and has many bad influences. This kid doesn't deserve to be in an environment where he's around other kids who want to learn ?

You're right that we are closer to agreement. That is that the problem is one of values. Why don't more poor people in this country value education ? How do we turn that around ? Especially in those key early years, when parental involvement (ideally educated parents who know the value themselves) is so important.

How do we make schools in bad (poor) neighborhoods a place where behavior has to be good, and where everyone attends ?

You see simple solutions to this. That's fine.