talk to me about public education

[ulysses]

We were talking about education with some friends last night. As always, my belief is that, without a citizenry capable of critical thought and possessed of a certain base of knowledge, there's really no point in even trying to keep up the facade of a democracy. Most schools keep plugging away at the task under a range of circumstances, and success and failure both rely on a variety of issues - does a child arrive on time and fed? is the teacher capable and not ridiculously overworked? are classroom resources available? And so on.

The common factor in all of these issues is the health (and even the existence) of the social contract and commitment to education. Where that contract is lacking, where parents treat school as a day care where things happen that don't concern them, where communities are unwilling to provide the financial resources necessary to make schools run well, most students will not emerge capable of being active, informed citizens.

And, of course, we live in a country that doesn't give much of a rat's ass about social contracts, much less citizenship. None of this even takes into account the long right-wing assault on the very idea of public schools.

Any thoughts? I'm the product of public schools, and I suspect many of us here are as well. How do we go about saving public education?

[ursacorwin]

1. parents are the only solution

i work in college admissions, and i get to see the differences between private school and public school kids every day. it's horrifying, to say the least. if this continues, we'll have two distinct classes in this country: those who've received an education, and those who are ignorant wage slaves willing to believe the sky is green and up is down because they heard it on TV.

wait, we're already there, aren't we?

but no matter where you live, or what your child status is, you should be concerned. the 'no-tax' madness that started as a fair critique of gov't spending has evolved into a 'fuck public works' of any kind, and the shrillest groups against increasing public support are the same one 20 years from now will be shaking their heads as they close their businesses saying, "what happened?"

politicians have shown they don't have the will to do what is needed. teachers try hard to inject facts into policy making, but they are overworked and underrepresented. the only group that can make a difference anymore is parents. parents need to go to schools and look around, and realize that just because you live in a 'nice' suburb or have all white neighbors no longer ensures your child will be educated- and college admissible.

this is a much, much bigger problem than most people realize.

[ulysses]

2. "wait, we're already there, aren't we?"

Yup. Agreed and agreed.

Good post! :thumbsup:

[liberalhistorian]

3. As the daughter of two teachers, I say we can save public education

by rolling up our sleeves and getting to work, regardless of whether or not we have children/grandchildren/nieces/nephews/cousins/whatever in the schools. We can volunteer to tutor, assist in classrooms, assist teachers in purchasing supplies, support the school's programs and innovations, help with maintenance and cleaning, become involved in PTA groups and school board elections, campaign strongly for levies, help to educate the general public on the importance of and need to maintain the schools, etc.

If everyone did just one of these things, public schools would be in a lot better shape!

[donco6]

44. Yes - and yet, it's also an area of inequity.

In my district, it's very difficult to find volunteers. We're low income and almost all of our parents work.

In the southern end districts, however, their affluence allows the moms and dads to stay home more often. They then have a steady pool of volunteers to draw from.

What's that saying about the "rich getting richer?"

[Muddleoftheroad]

4. It's a big problem

Public education is so bad in some areas, it would almost be better to start over.

I lived in D.C. and the school system there is a failure. Plain and simple. It stinks.

How many poor minority children will have to suffer with that system before we fix it? Ten thousand? One hundred thousand?

For most of them, their lives will be ruined by this failure. Until we can show that the system can be fixed, I'd rather have vouchers and let parents get their kids out while the getting is good.

[ulysses]

5. vouchers are a political, not an educational, fix

Even in the event that a voucher program was funded at a level that allowed every kid in a poor school to go private, where would they go? There just aren't that many private schools in the country, and you still get kids left behind.

[Muddleoftheroad]

7. If you build it

There will be a private educational system there to fill in the gaps. It can happen quick because, unlike the education bureaucracy, private companies can respond quickly. They will hire teachers away from schools and offer education that can't possibly be as bad as what we have in the District.

I am not advocating an end to public education (though it could be outsourced). But public education as it is now is broken.

[ulysses]

9. privatization

is what gave us Channel One. Private companies can indeed respond quickly, but I just can't see the solution to failing public schools being their replacement with entities whose ultimate responsibility is to shareholders.

[Muddleoftheroad]

32. Beholden

The firms would still have to meet requirements set down by the state. That way, they would beholden to both shareholders and the rest of us.

[Iverson]

116. big difference

"Requirements" as you use it are not the same things as laws guaranteeing equal access and certification requirements for teachers. On the other hand, private schools do indeed have to operate at a profit or else they go out of business.

Therefore, the earlier point about the primacy of the bottom line in private schools was a good one.

[Muddleoftheroad]

117. Operating at a profit

Can be one hell of a motivator. So can satisfying your customers. If a private school DOESN'T educate, no one goes there. Too bad it can't be the same for public schools. When they suck, students and parents have no options.

[Iverson]

120. wrong focus

The fundamental mission of public education is to educate. Whether the profit motive is the best, second best, or other motivator is irrelevant. It isn't supposed to supplant the guarantee of public education, and that gurantee is not dependent upon profit.

Also, parents do have options. Private schools exist, and will continue to exist, and nobody is calling for their elimination.

Any remedies to poor performance by public schools should not include undermining that guarantee or automatically cutting funding and then saying "do better."

[Muddleoftheroad]

121. Options

I don't know where YOU live, but in most of the U.S. families can't afford the options of private school. Instead they are stuck with substandard eduation in the public school system.

There is a guarantee of public education. How that occurs is NOT guaranteed. The state could simply outsource the schools and, you know what, those new firms couldn't do any worse than the schools in D.C.

[Iverson]

129. privatization as magic

I went through Detroit's public school system. That may well be worse than DC's, although where either of us lives or where we went to school really is irrelevant. The soundness of our arguments is what counts. At least that's what I learned in school.

"Outsourcing" public education may well result in higher standardized test scores (although it also might not), and other posters have listed some of the reasons, notably selective admissions. However, I prefer solutions that help rather than hurt public education.

[Muddleoftheroad]

130. But what do we do NOW

Long term, I probably agree with you. Short term, how do parents deal with completely failed school systems?

[Iverson]

133. it's never easy

In the immediate situation, you help your kids learn and think and study at home, insofar as that is possible. More broadly, you try to affect educational decisions by various interactions with the teachers, the school, the school board, and the ballot box. As a parent of two teens in school, that is what I do. I imagine that that is what my parents did in Detroit.

There are no guarantees ahead of time, and it is a great uphill battle against the mentality of de-funding public education and propaganda (e.g.- "no child left behind").

[Muddleoftheroad]

136. That's surrender

I don't go much for surrender. If we can't fix the school systems now, this year, then we need to give people the means to get the hell out of the worst ones.

[Iverson]

er, no

Defunding public education is surrender.

Nice chatting with you.

[Generic Other]

162. Usually, only Republicans advocate privatizing the public schools

Kind of shameful to see it so openly advocated on DU.

No matter where you go to school, it's the teachers who make the difference. I don't believe there is a single person in this country who could honestly say he or she never had a decent teacher or a positive experience in public school.

The best teacher I ever had was a public school teacher. She would have been the best teacher even if she had taught at the most prestigious private school in America, but she didn't take one of those easy jobs. She chose to serve her community. She taught public school for low wages, long hours, and little thanks. We didn't worry about falling behind in her day. She didn't allow it. We stayed after school until we got our work done. We stayed in at recess, and two kids came in every day in the summer until she was satisfied they were ready to go on to 7th grade. She gave us the tools we needed.

At the same time, we learned to live and work cooperatively (mostly) in a school that was a microcosm of real life. No sheltered "panic" room for people of one mind to separate themselves from people of another. No looking down our noses at those who had fewer advantages.
No judging people for thinking differently, worshipping differently, or looking different. At least not if you didn't want to be challenged.

If I had a choice, I would choose a public education. I do not wish to expose myself or my children to the values instilled in those who choose private schools. I don't particularly like the idea of my taxes paying people to send their children to such schools.

[LizW]

13. But then what do you have?

If you give every child in poor schools enough money to go to private school, and enough private schools spring up to take them all, don't you just have a publicly funded, privatized school system with no uniform standards?

What do you do if, once the private schools put the public schools out of business, the private schools decide they want to teach all creationism instead of science? Or they don't want to take any handicapped students? Or they want only girls, or only boys, or only Christians? What if the private schools decide they want to be all white?

[Muddleoftheroad]

34. This is easy to handle

Clearly, religious schools have one set of requirements. Private schools have another. The state can set guidelines that the schools must meet to be accredited.

If 90% of the students leave public school, it would be simple for the state or city to contract with one or several schools to educate the remaining 10%.

Personally, I like the CONCEPT of public education. The execution, however, stinks.

[LizW]

96. As soon as the state starts setting guidelines

that the private schools must meet, the private schools will stop taking voucher students.

When the state tells a private school that it must make the same accomodations for autistic, Downs Syndrome, blind, deaf, or non-english speaking children that public schools must make now, the private schools will do the cost analysis and decide that the voucher money is not sufficient to cover the costs of educating those special children.

[Muddleoftheroad]

108. Then don't mainstream those kids

We are trying to teach children and accommodating a few instead of teaching them in special classes is messing things up for the majority.

[Corgigal]

109. Sure

lets just violate "special childrens" rights. No IDEA for you, no 501. It doesn't work this way, we either educate these kids now or we as a society pay a larger price later.

[Muddleoftheroad]

112. Not what I said

I said don't MAINSTREAM them. Of course we teach them. But hindering the education of thousands for a few kids is insane.

Children have a right to an education, they should not have a right to be taught in the same classroom. If a special class or special school works, so be it.

[Iverson]

118. You missed the point.

LizW was talking about the costs of operating a school or district. You have reacted as if she was citing "mainstreaming" as a worthwhile policy. It may or may not be, but that is a separate issue.

LizW is right on the mark about the costs.

[Muddleoftheroad]

119. My point

Is that mainstreaming is a foolish waste of funds -- currently and if we outsourced to private schools. Yes, we definitely need to educate all children. But how we do it is at issue.

[donco6]

110. Uh, it's federal law to provide the "least restrictive environ"

If you don't, parents can and will sue, and you will lose. Big bucks.

The choice isn't ours to make on providing least restrictive environment.

[Muddleoftheroad]

113. Laws

Can be changed. This one can and should be fixed. We need to educate, but not hinder children.

[donco6]

149. Right.

Yeah, sure. No problem. We'll just change that federal law in a jiffy!

I won't say it's impossible, but I can think of some Republicans who'll change to Democrats sooner than that will happen.

[Muddleoftheroad]

150. Time

Well, let's face it. It's a lot easier to change that law than to fix the school system, so we might as well start somewhere.

[KamaAina]

160. Fine. I'll just give back my Yale degree and decent-paying job, then.

None of this would have been possible had not public education been accessible to me.

I am reminded of Ross Perot's comment that "we should concentrate on educating future taxpayers and not on those learning-disabled students". I was so angry I was about to send him one of my pay stubs, with the withholding highlighted!

For the record, a person with autism (yours truly) obtained a cum laude degree from Yale, while one with Bush* syndrome didn't even come close! Which one "deserves" to be educated?

[ulysses]

161. wow

I've got a couple of autistic kids this year. Good on you!

I hadn't heard that from Perot. Jackass.

[Classical_Liberal]

30. It its not failing in high tax base areas.

Vouchers and magnets on the other hand have not a had a good track record. Look at Texas.

[zoidberg]

62. How have magnets failed?

I attended a science and math magnet middle school in Houston, and I would bet anything that the education I received there was on par with any private school. Magnets don't do anything for those who aren't in the program, but they are a great way to cluster those kids who actually care about their education.

[Sly Kal]

52. If it is paid for by tax dollars it is NOT private education

Then it becomes faith based public education. It is about nothing else but taking power from the unions.

[liberalhistorian]

10. Not only that, but the few vouchers that are

available are for an amount nowhere near the full tuition of most private schools and there is no way that most parents receiving vouchers can make up the difference. Private schools have the choice of who they will accept as students, public schools don't have that luxury. They have to accept everyone. If all those screaming for vouchers would roll up their sleeves and get to work doing what's necessary to support their schools, which, frankly, is not being done right now by most parents, there wouldn't be a need for vouchers.

[ulysses]

11. exactly. n/t

[Pobeka]

138. Vouchers DESTROY public schools

Because of that very reason. You have a huge fixed cost (buildings, etc) in the public school system. Now you include that fixed cost when you say it costs X dollars a year to educate a student. If that parent takes the X dollars away in the form of a voucher (for a private school which may cost 2X), then the remaining school system now has to pay for the original fixed costs, and the only way to make up the difference is to take it out of the marginal costs (i.e. the teachers).

So, those who can afford the incremental over X needed to go to private school in reality are getting a subsidy for a private school, and those with incomes that prevent that, will have to stay behind in public school system even further constrained financially.

I'm not saying there aren't ineffeciencies (sp?) like many school district adminstrations are just absolutely clueless, but vouchers become the death of the public school system because it reduces the financial margins of the public school system.

I think the best way to solve this problem is to allow parents some legal authority (in the form of commissions perhaps), to mandate changes in their local administration. A top heavy administration is not going to cut itself...

[Classical_Liberal]

29. I don't agree

Those schools are bad because they are not funded as well as suburban public schools. Vouchers don't cover the cost of hardly any privates schools anyway. The problem is that we pay for schools with the local tax base. I believe in doing what Vermont did, though that won't help dc, because it isn't a state.

[alcuno]

6. Stop trying to destroy public education.

I am absolutely convinced that public education is being systematically destroyed in this country ..... on purpose. Having gone to both public and private schools and now teaching in the public schools, I feel I am amply qualified to speak on the subject.

Something else is going on here. Rather than efforts to improve education, I see efforts that are designed to destroy it. Over time, there has been an errosion in the confidence in teachers and the teaching profession. We also have public officials and others, with no professional experience, determining curriculum and testing standards.

I watched an operation on TLC the other day. Does that make me qualified to perform brain surgery? Somehow, people believe that since they went to school, it makes them qualified to determine curriculum and standards. We allow people who have never spent 5 minutes in a school after graduation to determine what goes on there. Public education is being talked right down to the basement. Private schools? Few or no standards for them.

[ulysses]

8. good point

We also have public officials and others, with no professional experience, determining curriculum and testing standards.

It's a dilemma, though - how do we get politicians out of the decision-making process for what is, after all, a public institution?

[alcuno]

12. Get public officials to stop micro-managing school systems?

Good luck. Our school board tinkered so much with report cards that they were practically unintelligible by the time they were done.

And yet if a nuclear power plant were being built, they'd hire someone proven to manage the job. Think they'd be writing the safety standards?

One thing about private schools and vouchers. When private schools are required BY LAW to provide the same services that public schools are required to provide, I'll think about vouchers. Not one moment before.

[jafap]

18. first, God created idiots, this was for practice.

Then he created school boards." Mark Twain ca 1900

As a product of seven years of University education, I feel that school is way over-rated anyway. In the first place, I learned to read and we all learned to talk without the benefit of an educational professional. I would point to such books as E.F. Schumacher's chapter on education in "Small is Beautiful" or Paul Goodman's "Compulsory Mis-education" which I cannot summarize here in a single pithy quote.

As far as believing the sky is green because someone said so - isn't that a result of the education process, which does not teach students to find the truth, but rather has a teacher, or a book, which states what the truth is, and the good student is expected to memorize it and regurgitate it on a test? Even when opposing points of view are taught, the student is not supposed to take a side, or consider the issue - just memorize the points made on each side long enough to take a test. Of course, as a teacher who was interested in his subject, I have tried to generate student interest, but mostly they are too pragmatic - is this gonna be on the test - is all they want to know.

[Generic Other]

163. Which side of the bread is getting buttered?

On my side of the public school slice, there is no butter. On the other side, the butter is spread so thick that they can barely stuff it into their mouths fast enough. Men like the Bush clan with two brothers signing mandatory public school failure programs into law at both the state and the federal level while a third brother sells them educational software to correct the so-called deficiencies of the failing public schools. Money changes hands at every level, but it always ends up in a Bush pocket by the end of the school year.

I don't need a private school education to figure out when I'm getting screwed and who's administering the treatment! That's one thing they did teach me in public school. How to spot a con.

[Warren Stuart]

14. Most public schools do an adequate job

Of teaching the basics. Private schools are not all they are cranked up to be. Their true value to the elite is to be a place where their kids can make connections that will advance them later in life. They are not necessarily getting a superior education, although they are making superior connections.

In a public school setting parents are the solution as well as the problem, everyone wants what best for their kids, even if it means cheating someone else's kids. I've seen instances where the worst kids were the tutored ones. By acting out in class, they deprived fellow classmates from learning, making it easier for them to excell.

There was an incident in New York recently, where a parent sued the City for expelling her child for disruptive behavior. She received sympathetic coverage in the media, even though the presence of her child meant that someone else's kid was going to have a harder time learning.

The advantage private schools have is that they don't have to take every student that wants to enroll, they can be selective and can weed out the bad apples.

[MissouriTeacher]

15. Great posts alcuno.

I agree with everything you've said.

[alcuno]

22. Hi MissouriTeacher!

I love the job.

[sandnsea]

25. My niece's private school

I remember visiting during her senior year. She got home on a Sunday night, threw together a 2 minute speech on cheerleading and got an A+++. That would never have happened at my daughter's public school. They also taught SAT testing from her freshmen year and up. Many other examples like that throughout her high school years. I'm not saying she didn't get an education, but I am saying my sister paid a pretty good amount of money over the years to get that 4.0 so my niece could be admitted to a good school and get a full-ride scholarhsip as well.

[donco6]

16. I work in public ed., and we haven't done enough, either.

I agree with the post about parents, but we in public ed. haven't done enough either.

Sure, I wish kids were different - that they were more curious for curiousity's sake about why things work the way they do. But today's student just doesn't seem to be intrigued by that anymore. And we haven't done anything, really, to make education relevant to them AS THEY ARE. We wring our hands and point fingers, but we have to deal with students as they are today. It just isn't enough anymore to provide the same industrial model of education, with credits awarded for seat-time.

Here in my district where I am CFO, we're in the midst of a radical change to our schools. We're breaking up our 1300-student high school into smaller schools that offer different educational models. One is an Expeditionary Learning school, where students learn content based on an "expedition" - for example, studying the water quality of a small watershed, where they learn science, math and civics (speaking before the county commissioners to deliver their research.) Another school is a "Big Picture" school where the focus is not on graduation from high school, but on what the kids view as success in life. Every student must serve an internship in their area of choice (some work in a hospital, others in a computer firm, others in a marketing co., many in various small businesses, some in non- or not-for-profits, etc.) The student is evaluated by their parents, teachers, intern coordinator, business/community members. In the next two years, we'll be creating three more schools - a High Tech High, a Performing Arts H.S. and probably another Big Picture school (they're limited to 140 students each.) Our goal is to provide avenues that make education relevant to every one of our students, so that they value education.

In addition, we're working hard with our teachers to enable them to deal with students who come into our schools without reading skills, with handicapping conditions, and with a wide variety of discipline issues. We are working to provide a "pyramid of interventions" that gives teachers and parents differing levels of support for each child, based on need. Some examples are mentors, tutors, counseling, social services, special education services and finally outplacement at a facility with an on-grounds school. Students in this category cost the district about $30-$40,000 each, so obviously we have to be very judicious in its use (we're funded at about $5,600/student).

Teachers today are have a different perspective on the profession, as well. Our teachers earn 31,000 in their first year, and about 69,000 at 20 years (top end). I personally don't think that's too shabby, considering they work 184 days (out of a typical 260-day work year). Plus, our retirement system pays 75% of HAS for life after 20 years at age 50 (no Social Security) - more if you work longer. So, yes, I believe they are paid well.

But it is difficult to get teachers to do anything beyond the contract day anymore - even *with* pay. Asking them to contact parents in the evening - when they're actually available - is laughable. *Many* have to be threatened with disciplinary action to even get them to complete their student attendance report, which is done through the computer during their work day. Holding training sessions is incredibly complicated and expensive, and demanding the teachers actually *implement* the training is even more difficult. Many teachers believe that - behind their classroom door - they should be allowed to teach any way they want, even when the best research and data analysis says it isn't working.

So, yes, we have a long way to go. Funding alone is not the answer. We in public ed. have to get our act together as well.

[alcuno]

21. Your post proves my point and I have no idea what CFO is.

First of all, I say this only to give weight to my argument, because there is a perception that anyone who argues for teachers must be a bad teacher just trying to continue slacking off.

I am the teacher that almost everyone wants. My principals show me notes from parents practically begging to get their child into my class and they do it because I am known thoughout the community as a great teacher. Parents considering moving their children out of the private schools, show up at my classroom door or call me on the phone to get my advice.

That said, I am sick and tired of hearing that teachers are the problem. And that is the bottom line of your post. When talking of change, I have never heard a teacher say they are unwilling to change. What they are unwilling to do, and add me to this group, is CHANGE EVERY YEAR! Personally, I think district office personnel are a huge problem because it appears that they are constantly implementing new things for teachers to do in order to justify their jobs. We are also fed up with the "busy work" paperwork coming from the district office that restricts our ability to do our jobs. Do the paperwork yourselves and stop sending me forms to fill out. Teachers not making phone calls or not willing to work with children? I find it next to impossible to believe.

You think 31,000/year is not "too shabby?" I think it's a disgrace. Obviously, your union needs to get off its ass and start advocating for teachers instead of standing around with a tin cup accepting whatever lame offer comes from administrative leaders lounging in air-conditioned offices.

[MissouriTeacher]

24. Damn, alcuno...

everytime I get ready to write a response, I just read your post and realize you've said the exact same thing I was going to say.

Okay, so I've never had a parent beg me to get their child in my class, but the rest of it I fully agree with. :)

[alcuno]

28. MissouriTeacher, If I lived in Missouri, I'm sure I would be.

If there are teachers not doing their jobs, it's the administrators' responsibility to deal with it. They shouldn't be let off the hook. I'm tired of them whining about bad teachers and doing nothing about it.

[MissouriTeacher]

31. Exactly right.

People seem much more willing to over-generalize when it comes to teachers.

My last dentist was an absolute jerk who could make the most simple dental procedure into a painful experience. Do I now go out and bitch about how terrible dentists are as a self-appointed expert on dentistry? Of course not, that would be silly. But people do that exact thing all the time when it comes to teaching.

Of course there are bad teachers, lazy ones, incompetent ones, etc. Those teachers should be dealt with by their administrators, but claiming in the whole system is flawed is jumping to wild conclusions.

[Yupster]

37. But if your dentist isn't any good

you go to a different dentist.

What do you do if you have kids in DC public schools and they suck?

[donco6]

38. Ah - doing something about the bad teachers.

Until we see bad teachers as EVERYONE's problem, nothing will change.

That having been said, there are at least three problems I can think of WRT school administrators' role in removing bad teachers:

One, in the same way that we have some crappy teachers, we also have crappy principals and asst. principals. I teach a class for aspiring principals at a local university, and I'm often appalled at the calibre of people in the program. Many cannot write a coherent paper if their lives depend on it. Their primary concern seems to be my grading scale and how many hours they're required to spend on their budget project. Only a few exhibit an actual desire to prepare themselves for the role of principal.

The second problem is principals and a.p.s who are afraid to confront bad teachers. They let them limp through their first three years of probationary, then allow them to receive tenure, and we ALL have to suffer with them for the next 17 years. In our district, this has gotten a bit better, in that our applications are up (we had 2000 apps for 50 positions last year). When apps are up, principals are more likely to nonrenew a teacher, being reasonably certain they can find a replacement. When teachers are scarce, it's not a motivator to let that bilingual special ed teacher walk out the door.

Finally, it's almost impossible, and always expensive, to remove a tenured teacher. We know that; the union knows that; and it works to everyone's detriment.

We had a teacher two years ago who was observed hitting her students. After all the hearings, appeals, mediation, etc., the district ended up buying out the rest of her contract and paying for two years of retirement just to get rid of her. And the question of her hitting students was never an issue - she admitted to that.

When you claim it's the administrators job to remove bad teachers, surely you realize that bad teachers reflect badly on ALL the teachers in the school. And yet, more often than not, when an administrator makes a move to remove a bad teacher - even one whose lack of skill is acknowledged by all - the teaching staff gets out the brickbats.

I'd say there's plenty of blame to go around in this arena.

[alcuno]

45. I've sat in on the same administrative hearings since I'm also

an officer for the union. You claim that bad teachers are a problem for all of us and that is true. However, the only ones with any authority to discipline or remove them are the administrators. Again, that is NOT a problem I can solve other than to wish for them to go away.

I'm sure that you WOULD say that there is plenty of blame to go around, but I don't agree. Not on this issue. Administrators need to stop whining about how difficult it is to remove bad teachers, shirking their responsibility, and then pointing to other teachers as the problem.

[donco6]

49. No whining from this end.

Simply pointing out the difficulties. We'll continue to evaluate them, train them, coach them and yes, remove them, all the while dodging the aforementioned brickbats.

[jafap]

40. Ah, but the great thing about Kearney

besides being the birthplace of Dylan Klebold (or was it Charles Guiteau? I cannot keep my rogues straight) is that it is only 35 miles down lovely highway 92 to get to Kansas. It is hardly the home of the damned.

I see somethings to agree with, but the idea that a $31,000 starting salary is "a disgrace" seems to put you in a major metro area. The salary for my old mathematicians job for the Air Force is less than $30,000 and that job goes all year, 9 hour days and only one day off for Christmas, etc.). BTW, why the huge salaries for those who brag about their ignorance regarding the meaning of Chief Financial Officer? And for a seemingly snippy answer to a laudatory post?

I was at a Christmas party with a HS guidance counselor who was retiring before age 60 and complaining that she hadn't had a raise in five years. I felt bad for her, since she probably made more than $40,000 compared to my awesome $11,000 factory job which I am sure must have been way more fulfilling too, especially on those 110 degree summer days without AC. If she wanted to take up a collection I was willing to donate a whole mouthful of spit.

The poor, underpaid, over-worked teacher shtick is not my favorite. Of course, I have also worked in an air conditioned factory with a former English teacher and have a classmate who went into real estate from teaching math after our 20 year reunion. But when a story went around about a shortage of math teachers in 1984, the math education department tripled in size with college graduates coming back to get one of those low-paying jobs.

[lazarus]

47. ah

But did your factory job require you to have a specialised 4 year degree? Did it require you to essentially have hundreds of people criticising you, instead of just your boss? Did it require you to continue your education on your own dime?

Did your factory job require you to work several hours a day at home, in addition to your time at work?

As to your Air Force job, I was in the AF, too. One day off for Xmas? 30 days leave a year isn't bad. Nor is complete health care and all the other benefits.

Oh, and that HS guidance counsellor? If her job requirements were the standard, she actually had to have a post-graduate degree.

[donco6]

56. As someone with a post-grad degree in education . . .

. . . and many hours toward a doctorate, I have to say that a lot of it is crap.

And, for teachers in our district, though they may have to further their education on their own dime, they receive an automatic pay upgrade when they surpass 15 semester hours (avg. $4,000 per year).

And, teachers are covered 100% for medical insurance, life, dental, and short-term disability. I don't know of any private company that offers that.

AND, teachers have a considerable amount of job security, unlike the factory worker, who is usually an "at will" employee.

AND, teachers have a retirement system that pays them 75% of highest average salary with 20 years at age 50. Compare that with social security!

Let's be honest about the benefits comparisons.

[lazarus]

98. of course

And let's be honest that 30k for a degreed professional is crap. It's even lower in some states, such as Alabama.

[donco6]

157. As I mentioned before . . .

that's a starting salary for a first-year newbie with a BA or BS. For someone with a masters degree and no experience, that rises to $35,232. For someone with a masters and 60 hrs. with 10 years experience, it rises to $54,236. After 20 years, it's $69,337. Then PERA kicks in to provide 75% of your highest avg. salary for life upon retirement, with guaranteed COL increases.

We had 2000 apps for 50 positions, so I don't think the wages are a problem here.

[lazarus]

172. heh

Substantially higher than Alabama.

And the number of apps is strictly a factor of the high unemployment in the private sector. Read an article about that just the other day.

So, after 20 years, with major post-graduate college, you still can't hit 6 figures? Yeah, that's a real draw there.

Hey, at least you have the privilege of being blamed for society's ills, and get to be yelled at by the parents who don't just ignore you.

[jafap]

103. since you were in the Air Force

you should know that there are lots of civilians who "work" for the Air Force as well. I was a GS-5 potential 12. The health insurance was not free, so I did not get it. We only got 13 days of leave a year, and I am not sure about "all the other benefits." That was a job which required a BA, but did not pay as well as a starting teacher's job. Also, after I jumped off the good job train in 1986 I have not been able to get back on. The only use I have found for my MA was a one year part-time teaching job at a University for $8100 a year, and I have used it as an archery target, and a dartboard, but it makes a very poor dartboard. I envy people who have degrees which actually qualify them for a job. As the way it goes, first they got the job, then they got the degree.

[Yupster]

53. My pet peeve is

that teachers are largely not in social security. They have their own system (TRS) in which they pay the amount they would have paid into social security, and they get a benefit from 2-3 times as good as social security.

If teachers were just put back into social security, it would relieve a large burden from the social security system. I don't know how teachers became such priviledged workers that only they get to have their own system. I sure liked it when I was a teacher though.

[donco6]

57. Here in Colorado it's not just the teachers . . .

. . . all state employees participate in the Public Employees Retirement Association.

Otherwise, it sounds similar to your TRS.

There are often attempts made to eliminate this, but the states have been successful in beating them back.

[Yupster]

80. But isn't that ironic

We're going to have a government retirement program for everyone called social security, but government workers are exempt?

What makes them so priviledged?

[donco6]

91. Not all gov't workers - just state workers.

What makes them so privileged? I don't know. All I know is, Colorado and many other states decided at one point that privately funding their employees' retirements was cheaper and better than social security. Can't really blame them for wanting to provide something better.

[Yupster]

95. I don't blame them a bit, but ...

what about the rest of us? How come we don't get that choice?

When a kid's dad dies, I want the rest of us to contribute and give him a payment until he gets out of school each month. That's the humane thing to do, but I have to say it bugs me that we all contribute to help this kid from our social security ... except for school teachers. Of all people, you'd think they'd want to contribute. Obviuosly they like kids or they wouldn't be teachers.

Same thing for a disabled person who gets SSI benefits. I want to help this person with a check every month from social security, but I can't for the life of me think why teachers don't want to contribute their share. Like I said earlier it's a pet peeve of mine how teachers, and I guess other state workers have set up a system of safety nets, and excluded themselves from contributing to it.

"We need to help these poor people... well, when I set we, I meant you, because we're exempt."

[jafap]

104. you seem to miss the point

that Social Security is not supposed to be a retirement system, only a supplement or a safety net. It has done a very good job of reducing poverty among the elderly. Lots of places have 401Ks or pensions on top of the FICA taxes you pay. As a city employee my latest raise will get eaten up by the mandatory 3% contribution to KPERS on top of the 15.3% in FICA taxes I am paying. The FICA is not my retirement - the KPERS is, along with my IRA, and hopefully it also pays better than social security.

[Yupster]

166. I don't think I'm missing the point

I pay to FICA.
You pay to KPERS.

If we each make 50 k, we each contribute the exact same amount.

But when we each retire at age 65, your benefit is 2 1/2 times mine.

What the $#@#$% is that?

Now I might have an IRA, and you may have a 403B. That's fine, but it doesn't have anything to do with the FICA versus KPERS unfairness.

The problem is that the government made a retirement program that we would all share in. Then they carved themselves out of the system and created a much better plan for themselves. And the rest of us stuck in the much more sucky plan are supposed to just be happy with what we have and accept that some workers are just more priviledged by the government? And those priviledged workers just happen to be government workers. What a shock that is.

[donco6]

152. Remember, it's not that they're not contributing.

Our staff does contribute the same amount that they would if they were on social security, it just doesn't go to social security. So to ask them to contribute to s.s. would be asking them to pay TWICE, which is obviously unfair.

[Yupster]

164. I just want the same deal they get

If I have to be in social security, why do they get to say no thanks?

If I contribute to a kid whose dad dies, why don't they?

If they can opt out of social security, why can't I?

When did they become so priviledged to get a retirement plan 2 1/2 times better than mine when we both contribute the exact same amount?

[donco6]

167. Luck, I guess.

No other explanation that I can think of.

[alcuno]

169. I put my 40 quarters into social security and I still get nothing.

In Illinois, teachers who contribute (as they must) to their retirement system are not eligible for social security. It doesn't matter if you put in your 40 quarters before you entered teaching or do so through summer jobs. That money goes in but no teachers ever see a dime of it.

[Yupster]

170. So is your TRS going to be less than FICA would have been

if you had worked your whole life contributing to social security? The maximum monthly benefit from social security is what? somewhere around $ 1,400 a month?

I bet you're still coming out way better than the poor slob stuck in social security, like me.

And have you heard about the scam the teachers in Texas pull? They don't retire from their district. They just quit and then work one day at a district that deducts both TRS and FICA. Then they retire with social security and TRS.

That may have been ended this summer. I know the congress was trying to get rid of that piracy of the system.

I'm a financial advisor who works a lot with teachers, and I have recommended dozens of them do this over the years. It gets them hundreds of dollars a month, but it's a legal scam.

[Sly Kal]

59. and you were working in a factory with a masters or doctorate?

That is what that guidance counselor had, plus 40 years of experience. 60k after 35 years when some one has an advanced degree is pathetic, but teachers do it because they are teachers by nature and they want to.... certainly not because the money is great.

[Yupster]

81. Lets not go gaga over masters of education degrees

Teachers get them to get the stipend on the salary schedule.

Mine is in Currriculum and Instruction. My wife's is in Administration.

Educationally they were a joke - pretty much worthless. We took the classes during the summer to get the stipend. The professors knew that so they made the classes short and easy. Let's not get arrogant over education degrees.

[Pavlovs DiOgie]

84. Must be nice

I had to write countless research papers on top of the regular coursework and pass an arduous exam to get my Masters. Not to mention the cost of the program which my salary increase doesn't come close to matching.

[Yupster]

89. I didn't do anything to get my masters

it was a joke.

[donco6]

92. I rest my case.

Noting this same point in my own post. Thank you, Yupster.

[jafap]

102. Actually I was. MA class of 1990 U of Ne

But that is not really the point. 40K is 40K no matter how many degrees you have, and do not expect alot of sympathy about money from people making 11K, especially when the people making 11K are paying the taxes which pay the higher salary. As I mentioned before the people who entered the math education department in 1984 already had college degrees and seemed to feel that being a 7-12 math teacher was a job worth going back to school for.

[lazarus]

173. good for them

And how little do you think the people responsible for our children's education should be paid, anyway?

[donco6]

33. I'm speaking from experience.

I'm the Chief Financial Officer (CFO). Sorry if I wasn't clear.

Yes, paperwork is a pain in the ass. That's why I'm here on Sunday, filling out the latest forms for the yearly audit, which is required by state law. I don't pretend to speak for all districts, but I know that HERE, we avoid sending paperwork down the line if we can avoid it. But taking daily attendance isn't too much to ask, IMO. And if there are any jobs out there that don't require paperwork, I'll be first in line. Until then, paperwork is part of the job.

Yes, there are changes that take place every year. What we DON'T do here is change the philosophy each year. The change may consist of adding staff development to a particular discipline - say math or science, as I mentioned in my post. From the teacher's perspective, that may seem like changing every year, but the fact is, we can't afford to wait. Our district accreditation depends on improving test scores (and I'm talking moving our kids from 8% - yes EIGHT - proficient in math to something at least marginally acceptable). If we fail to be accredited, the district is taken over and chartered. Presto! No more Master Agreement, no more Union - which is ultimately the state's goal.

I sit in on the disciplinary hearings, so I know what I'm talking about WRT to teachers who do not call parents. I wish it weren't true, but the facts say otherwise. At the elementary level it isn't as much of a problem, but at the secondary it's rampant.

As I stated, $31,000 is the starting salary for a first year teacher. It's the highest in our state (Colorado). I realize that's low compared to other states, but then our funding per pupil is also quite low compared to other states. The union can get "off its ass" all it wants to raise beginning salaries, but the end result will be layoffs and pupil/teacher ratio increases. No one benefits from that, IMO.

Not that the union cares about *beginning* salaries, mind you. We've advocated for years to a collapsing of the salary schedule, eliminating steps to allow for higher beginning salaries, but the union will have none of it. I sit on negotiations, so - again - I know of what I speak. Considering we also pick up 100% of first person health coverage, dental, life, disability and more than half of the retirement benefit, yes, I'd say we're fine in the salary arena.

Oh, and all of our schools are 100% air conditioned. My office now is not, since it's Sunday.

Again, until we begin looking to ourselves for the solutions, rather than complaining about ill-prepared kids, uninvolved parents, and inadequate funding, public education will continue down its dismal path.

[Lauren2882]

77. If parents and students are begging to get into your classes...

don't you think that indicates that you are the exception, not the rule? That is, why would they be so eager to have you as a teacher if the other teachers were also competent?

There are a lot of bad teachers out there. You may not be one of them, but you can't ignore the fact that they're out there.

[alcuno]

87. I never ignore that fact.

And my reason for bringing it up is only because teachers who advocate for teaching are often assumed to be slackers who just want to continue to be able to slack off.

Again, administrators are the only ones with the authority to do anything about bad teachers.

[donco6]

93. In my district, we know the good teachers.

"teachers who advocate for teaching are often assumed to be slackers who just want to continue to be able to slack off."

You want to know what my standard for good teaching is? It's so easy. It's those teachers you see leading the trainings, stepping in to learn new techniques, and you see them ALL THE TIME. They're the ones you can depend on to tell you exactly what they think, without mincing words or doing it behind your back. I know two teachers - both HUGE union supporters - who I would choose hands-down over any other teacher to represent our schools because they are fantastic! When they say something, I listen to it, because I know they are almost always right. We've adopted many new ideas because of them, we're avoided many disasters because of them, and others like them.

I don't know where you may be alcuno, but I wish it were somewhere where the administration had not treated you so badly. I really, honestly do. It really can be better than you paint.

[alcuno]

122. I missed something here.

My only reason for making the statement about slacking off was because there are those on DU who equate teacher advocacy with teacher slacking.

[donco6]

158. And I was just clarifying that . . .

. . . I'm not one of those people.

[ulysses]

23. well sure - there's enough to do to go around

I like the different learning methods approach, although I would add that it seems like kids respond to having a variety of methods.

re: your teachers - I don't ascribe to the belief that teachers can do no wrong, but I wonder how much administrivia they have to deal with all told. Yeah, 184 work days, but how much time do they put in nights and weekends? I only have 40 or so kids in a small private school right now, and I spend two hours a night, roughly, grading, doing lesson plans, filling out endless forms and student journals - all unpaid time. Additionally, most of the teachers I know don't just get summers off, but take other jobs to pay the bills.

Thanks - interesting perspective.

[donco6]

36. You can read my other posts, but my overall statement . . .

. . . is that GOOD teachers are simply priceless, but there aren't enough GOOD teachers, such as yourself.

Administrivia - yeah, hate it too. But when you're trying to manage a $50 million budget, there are going to be some forms to fill out. Wish we had enough support staff to do it all for the teachers, but there aren't. The only way to do that would be to increase class sizes, and no one wants that either.

One example - state law here requires a full inventory of all chemicals in the district each year. We collected most from the custodians (cleaning chemicals), but the science teachers wouldn't fully comply. Finally, during our yearly inspection by the fire dept., they found some potentially explosive chemicals (picric acid) that had not been noted by the teachers. A complete inventory was taken, and it was found that the teachers HADN'T LOOKED BEHIND THE FRONT ROW of chemicals on the shelves. Yes, this is typical administrivia, but sometimes there are good reasons for it. And it's not too much to ask the professionals to do their job.

[Yupster]

54. I quit teaching because of the principal

too bad because I was a very god teacher. Also wrote the teacher's edition to a history textbook.

Oh well -- I got a better job and they didn't get a better teacher.

[Yupster]

82. Too late to edit own post

god teacher should have read good teacher. Talk about your typos. Geeze.

[Nikia]

17. Some are better than others

Perhaps this is the problem. There are schools that fail completely with few students even able to graduate with the basics. There are schools that do a good job at teaching the basics but do not prepare students for college. Then, of course, there are superior schools in which students learn more than they would at many colleges. I think that many schools in working class and poor areas aim for category two. For a school to be superior, takes parents to demand that their children are taught a challenging curriculum and of course an adequate tax base to cover it.

[Yupster]

19. I taught in my local public school system for nine years

That's why my kid is in private school.

I hope public schools, the horrible ones and the mediocre ones can be brought up to speed. But in the meantime, my kid will go to the best school in town.

[madfloridian]

20. This post I made is tied in somewhat.

We don't have a clue what Jeb is doing here. We do know he is systematically trying to damage the public schools and the image of the teachers.

This may explain some of it.
It looks like tests will prevail, and used to group schools.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=189986

I taught for many years. It is tearing me up to see the way the schools are being destroyed here. The parents don't even realize what games Jeb is playing in order to turn the schools into profit-making entities.

When they wake up, it will be too late. There will not be a public school system here. Apparently this is going on in other states, too, and the people do not know.

[donco6]

41. No where is it more evident than Florida,

that the goal of the Republicans is the break the union.

Now, I've had my share of run-ins with the union, but in general, they keep their side of the bargain, and we keep ours. When the pendulum isn't swinging too wildly, the relationship works pretty well.

But the clock is ticking on the union. No Child Left Behind demands schools achieve "adequate yearly progress" on test scores, or they face various levels of sanctions, including chartering. Once chartered, schools no longer have to abide by the Master Agreement, and the union is finished.

Many would argue that AYP is simply unattainable, and that chartering is inevitable for all schools - even "good" ones. I ask, how many charter schools will it take to decimate the NEA and AFT?

[Octafish]

26. An Education is the only sure cure for Poverty ...

...said my grandfather, who was an educator.

[Yupster]

55. I saw some stat about education

If you do three things, you have less than a 2 % chance of being poor. They were...

1. Graduate high school
2. Not get married until you're 22
3. Not have any kids until you're married

I thought that was kind of interesting, but it was years ago when I was a teacher that I read that at an inservice and I quit 13 years ago. I don't know if they still hold today.

Also, only 2 % of adopted kids were living in poverty. That one was only a few years old.

[Octafish]

86. Makes sense.

I used to be a newspaper reporter. Once a year, some friends in the local school district would ask me to talk to the kids at the junior high during "Career Day." So, I'd go in and tell them about what I did.

To get them to pay attention, I'd first ask "How many of you here think school is a prison?" As the teacher glared at me, almost all hands would go up. Then I'd continue: "Well, that goes to show how things appear on the outside. Small windows. Big walls. You're told where to go and what to do all day. But, the reality is totally different. School is where you get the power you need to take your life anywhere you want to go — knowledge. And that is true freedom."

Then it was the kids turn to stare. The teachers would smile. I'd go back to write about whatever, thankful I got an education, despite myself.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

27. I've said this before, but

we have the most locally controlled system in the world. It's so locally controlled that it's probably a misnomer to call it a system.

Each municipality decides, through its elected school board, how much money to tax itself for and how that money will be spent. Parents and other residents of the municipality elect the board.

We need to remind parents of that again and again. If their kids are not getting a proper education, it's up to them to lobby the school board, or better yet, vote the school board out and get some competent people in.

It's easier to sit around and bitch than to attend school board meetings or support a candidate.

Another thing that burns me up is parents who, instead of working to make life better for all children, just put their kids in private school and consider the problem "solved." I don't have kids, but sometimes I think that becoming a parent turns on a selfishness gene in some people, so that all they think about is their little darling and the rest of the kids in the world can go to hell.

There is nothing inherently wrong with public schools. All those high-achieving schools in other countries are public schools.

What those other countries have that we don't have is a national commitment to education and a belief that it's good to know things and bad to be ignorant.

Too many people in the States think that the only purpose of school is to prepare kids for jobs. It's not. Among other things, a good school should prepare kids to be informed citizens (by teaching history, geography, and science) and to spend their time in worthwhile ways (by teaching them to love reading, music, art, crafts, theater, and other "frills").

Private school may be good for your individual child, but what about all the other children?

Oh, and we can see the effects of a total voucher system at work, because that's basically what Northern Ireland has. The Catholic kids all go to Catholic schools, and the Protestant kids all go to Protestant schools, all of which get government aid based on enrollment. Many observers ascribe the intractibility of the troubles there to the fact that Catholics and Protestants live completely separate lives, even in childhood.

There used to be a program based in Minnesota that brought children from Northern Ireland over for the summer to get away from the violence, and the children were invariably astounded to find Protestants and Catholics associating freely with each other.

I'm rambling, but my main point is that parents need to use the power that they already possess and don't know about (or don't use--since they're too worn out from taking the kids to sports practice and therefore don't have the time or energy to worry about whether their children are literate).

[ursacorwin]

35. perhaps that's the problem

too much of a ridiculous mix of local control that isn't used plus federal policy derived from the back of a crackerjack box...

i honestly don't know how to make communities care more about education. i work with the upper-end of the educational system; the college i work for is private and highly ranked, the parents i see are for the most part well off and educated...yet so many of them have just fobbed their kids off onto some private school, and don't think about it beyond, "will jonny get into private college x?" this is the demographic *most* concerned with their kids education, i can only imagine what it's like for working families in poorer school districts.

not all private high schools schools are better, not all public ones suck. in fact, some of the best of both defy sterotypes and so-called realities of finances and *still* turn out outstanding future citizens. educators know that there are at least three or four successful models for educating every single group of students, regional variation has proven that. yet communities keep choosing stupidly, picking test score initiatives and teacher demonification policies over what is proven...

but the bottom line from my perspective is simple. there are, and will continue to be in greater measure, a ruling elite of people who are educated in high school because they can afford it or luck into it. everybody is else left to their own wits, with variously crumbling public resources to assist them in the process of self-education. the elite send their offspring to elite universities and incestuously selective business opportunities, and skew the cultural indicators to reflect more positively upon this 'accomplishment' with politically motivated tests and rankings. a widespread if somewhat hidden geneology is shared, which in turn infiltrates all levels of policy making and punditry. in the end, a two-tiered system is perpetuated, in which it is nearly impossible for non-elites to enter into the closed system, and which reinforces cultural and educational inequality for purposes of profit and control. and they laugh at the rest of the world for not knowing how the game is played.

am i too cynical? i don't know. but i do consider myself to be a member in the last generation of americans to benefit from free and fair access to education, and when i go out into the educational work force i worry that i will encounter few faces like mine in the classroom...

[DesignGirl]

43. This is why we home school.

You are so right about the elite class. I homeschool my sons now because I could see how it was going when my oldest son started public school in 1995. It was suposed to be one of the "good" schools. The PTA had so much money they couldn't decide what to do with it. We were new to the area, and not especially wealthy. We could never fit the mold.
Another problem I have with the educational system is the fact that they expect each child to be exactly the same at the same age. What other time in your life are you only around people your same age expected to do the exact same thing.
It really seems like education for most (except the elites) is just a way the break you spirit and make you accept what an authority figure says. A guess a little like the military.
The other thing I hated was the consant use of testing as the only way to decide a students knowledge. Most test are so subjective to who makes and grades a test(another coporate money thing).
We have been doing great with home schooling but now I think there is some sort of federal regulations trying to come out.
There are some really good information here:

http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/newsletter/index.htm

This man was a New York City teacher for 35 years.

[donco6]

46. I hate your assessment, but I fear it's true.

I can't stress how hard we are working to defy your prediction, but every once in a while that little demon of despair pops in to question whether it's even worth it to try.

[donco6]

39. I agree with you.

I believe a large scale voucher program will result in the Balkanization of America.

[SoCalDem]

42. Assembly-line education creates more problems than it solves..

In my (olden days) childhood, there was an elementary school in EVERY nighborhood...Kids walked to school (we're talking WINTER here too)usually no more that 3 or 4 blocks..

The schools were not huge, and all the students knew each other and the teachers..Parents were more involved back then, but..... the environment was friendly and cozy..

they were k-6

then we had 3 junior highs..again not HUGE, but a gradual step up in numbers... 7,8,9th grade...

High school ( 2 of them and a catholic girls and boy's high schools)

10,11,.12 grades


Kids were grouped with "like aged" kids and usually not more than a few years separation in the "danger years"..


Here in calif, they have elementary k-4
"middle" school..5-8

high school 9-12

They have set up a predatory system by making the schools too large (my son's high school was 4,500 kids..:eyes: and it was one of 5 high schools in town..


Too many kids to adequately supervise... too many really young ones mixed in with too many older and wiser ones.. at middle and high school level..

Teachers spend too much time on "paperwork" and planning and not enough on teaching..:(

A good start would be to bring back neighborhood schools, elminating the need for bus transportation.. More schools..smaller and cheaper to build... Use the savings to hire more teachers:)

[greekspeak]

50. Springfield, MO has a lot of the older neighborhood schools

The system keep shutting them down-they compare capacity percentages, see too low a number, and shut it down. Then, they gripe in the same breath about overcrowding! REDRAW THE ATTENDANCE BOUNDARIES!! The parents go ballistic! They insist that the neighborhood schools provide a great envirnoment for learning. You are right...Kids need more attention in the classroom, and we need to reduce class size and get teacher ratios into sync.

[donco6]

51. IMO, the Middle School has to go.

I believe it's becoming more obvious that this structure is a failure. Our middle schools perform so poorly that the data shows the kids would learn just as much staying home all year!

Unfortunately, the state provides no funding for capital costs, so we're a little stuck right now.

[bbernardini]

48. I've taught in both private and public schools...

I'm currently teaching music in a private school. I've taught at some great public schools, and some horrid ones. It's been said before, but the best ones are where parents get involved. My first public school gig was at my old high school, with my old band teacher. The music department there has amazing parent support, and it shows in the success of the music kids outside of music activities.

On the other hand, I taught at several public schools where the only goal of the administration was to play politics and look good for their superiors, even if it meant the education of the children suffered. The parents either didn't notice or didn't care, and took their child's word over the teacher's when it came to classroom conflicts. The administration did the same, simply because they did not want to be bothered. The kids had little parent involvement, and they were poorly behaved and did not do well.

The private school I'm at now has incredible parent support. We demand a lot of the kids, but they deliver, and the parents don't complain (except for the ones who complain about everything...there's always a few in every school). It's the only school I've ever taught at where more than one kid knew who John Coltrane was and enjoyed his work!

</soapbox>

[MaverickX]

58. fund it through general revenue as opposed to...

Local property taxes for one.

[MassDem4Life]

60. Ok then explain this to me....

Why does it take my public school district $9123.00 per student to educate my kids(poorly) While St. joe's in the next town will give the a better education for $2,750.00 per student. $2,250.00 if I am a catholic parishoner in the area?

[ulysses]

61. well, I don't know

I'm not familiar with your school district. Are you implying that *all* public schools are somehow wasteful of money, or that they *all* educate poorly?

Wanna send your kid to St. Joe's? Knock yourself out. Just don't demand public money to do it.

[MassDem4Life]

64. YES!!! ALL PUBLIC SCHOOLS PISS MONEY AWAY!!!

and why are you against my tax dollars going to the school I send my kids to wether public or private?

Why do you say; Wanna send your kid to St. Joe's? Knock yourself out. Just don't demand public money to do it.

When the public schools are demanding my money even if I dont send my kids there.

Please remember there was no public money until it came out of all of our pockets.

[ulysses]

69. news flash

All public *institutions* spend money in ways that some folks find wasteful. If you're hot about government waste, try looking at the Pentagon.

When the public schools are demanding my money even if I dont send my kids there.

Because, as I mentioned, a democratic society is dependant on the education of the governed. That's the social contract - even if *your* kid isn't in the school, it benefits you in the long run for the school to be there and functioning well.

Please remember there was no public money until it came out of all of our pockets.

This is true. Your point?

[MassDem4Life]

99. ok let me put this another way seeing as you blew right past

my point without even acknowledging the question.

You are out looking for a new car, you decide upon a very well regarded, very safe, very well built car; a Volvo.

but the federal government has decided to subidize GM because they have 300,00 employees, and another 2,000,000 in direct supplier companies, The gov. has decided that Gm is essential to the national economy. They have demanded that everyone pay Gm a subsidy of $9000 per year wether you want one or not.

So, now before you buy your volvo, which although more expensive than the GM prodcut you COULD afford, you now cant because you have to pay GM $9000 FIRST!

So you will have to settle for the inferior product because that is all you can afford.

IS THIS FAIR? OR RIGHT?

[ulysses]

105. read Lydia Leftcoast's reply to your first post

You're missing my initial point anyway. Providing education to a nation that includes the children most private schools won't take is not even remotely related to buying a damned Volvo.

[MassDem4Life]

140. i read Lydia's reply, ok, lets recap, and maybe you will understand

You stated that I was free to send my kids to private school, just dont ask for public money to do it.

I responded that; 1.) The "public" money for my kids was paid by Me before it was relabelled "public" 2.) i gave you a scenario in another industry illustrating the issue of advocating that my tax dollars support a school that doesn't educate my kids, while decrying having a portion of my tax dollars support the school that does.

You chose to ignore the fundamental arguments here, and make a further philosophical statement, unsupported by anything. My issue is not with the sped kids. My issue is why you wish to force low and middle income parents to keep their kids in failing schools, thereby eliminating effective competition, thereby allowing the public schools to maintain their stranglehold over education in this country.

For 30 years we have thrown money at education.Test score and general knowledge has continued to drop. What have we gotten for our money?

Let me make my position clear;

I AM ALL FOR PUBLIC EDUCATION PROVIDING IT DOES EDUCATE OUR CHILDREN
When it fails in its assigned task, I owe it no loyalty, I look for a school that will educate my children. I wish I didnt have to pay to send my kids to a private school to get them what they are not receiving in the public schools.

Do you realize that 74% of all incoming freshmen in colleges need remedial reading, writing and arithmetic. this means that the cost of college goes up too, as they have to spend their first smester or two, recapping what they SHOULD have learned in high school.

[ulysses]

159. yes, I understand all that.

When it fails in its assigned task, I owe it no loyalty

Thank you for neatly illustrating my original point about the lack of a public commitment to educating *all* children.

I have no problem with private schools. I taught in one for four years in the mid- to late nineties, and I'm teaching in another one now. The thing is that vouchers will not allow all, or even most, families with kids in failing public schools to transfer to private schools. They simply won't. The elementary tuition where I teach now is $5,000 per year; at my old school, the high school tuition was three times that. Vouchers simply won't make a difference for most folks.

I wish I didnt have to pay to send my kids to a private school to get them what they are not receiving in the public schools.

As do I. Are you involved with your school district?

Do you realize that 74% of all incoming freshmen in colleges need remedial reading, writing and arithmetic.

Yes. I just don't believe that taking away more tax revenue from failing schools will do anything except exacerbate the problem for the majority of kids who have to remain in those schools.

[donco6]

72. No they don't

That's a pretty silly generalization. Not worth arguing about, frankly.

[MassDem4Life]

100. REALLY?

show me ANY public school district in the country that uses its money EFFICIENTLY!

Show me any district whose test score, and record of academic achievement has grown with the growth in its budget.

And please dont quote me the pitifully few publc success stories such as PS161, in NYC, or Bronx PS 69, or Boston Latin, or Roxbury Latin.

Those are unfortunately the anomaly not the rule.

if they were the norm we wouldnt be having this convo

[donco6]

111. OK, mine.

And I should know - I'm the CFO.

[MassDem4Life]

141. really, define

efficiently, in your eyes.

Tell me how far test scores have increased along with your budget. What porportion of your total budget makes it to the classroom in the form of teachers salaries, TA pay, Books, equipment. If it is over 60% that puts your district in the most efficient 2% of public schools nationwide.

[donco6]

151. Since 1994

When the legislature finally began giving inflation raises to school per pupil funding, our district test scores in reading have increased by over 30%. Funding has increased by about 16%. We're breaking the curve there.

Over 62% of our budget goes directly to the classroom, with a large portion of the remainder going to maintenance and operations (which cannot be classified as "instructional" under federal accounting guidelines). Only 2% goes to central administration, and 10% goes to school administration (principals, secretaries, deans, etc.)

Having said all that, I know there are some schools that aren't as efficient. All I ask is that we avoid painting us all with the same broad brush.

[alcuno]

65. "I know! I know! Call on me!"

The public schools are required by law to provide services that the private schools are not required to provide. For example, we have a student in our school who is handicapped and as part of his individual education program (IEP) gets a full-time aid who travels with him throughout the day. That is just one tiny example of what public schools MUST provide. Granted, some programs are reimbursed by the state or federal government, but others, like "No Child Left Behind," are unfunded mandates. It all adds to the "per pupil" costs. You have social workers, bussing, special education, standardized testing, gifted education, free/reduced lunch programs, etc. The list never seems to end.

Private schools get to pick and choose their students. I remember back at my Catholic high school, we were threatened to be returned to the public school if we didn't toe the line. I can't recall any special needs students there either.

[MassDem4Life]

67. Ok, that explains a portion of the cost difference, but...

what about the curriculum difference?

The public schools curriculum is vastly watered down form what I learned in public schools. My kids are in the SAME schools that I graduated from and I can compare my tests and books to theirs, BIG difference!

I have been told not to help my daughter learn to read. that by correcting her I will stunt her educational growth.

I have been told not to correct her spelling because it will damage her self esteem.

I have been told that it is callous to expect my kids to learn to do math without a calculator. That is was stupid to waste precious resources teaching kids to memorize multiplication tables in the third grade because pocket calculators are so readily available. This was by the superintendent of schools in Dayton Ohio, in 1994.

THESE ARE some of the problems!

[donco6]

70. None of our schools would tell you any of that.

It's hard to fight these anecdotes. All I can say is that in our schools we have family literacy nights where parents are ENCOURAGED to help their children read.

MassDem4Life, I think your children are much better off wherever you have them now.

[Pavlovs DiOgie]

75. the curriculum difference

Chalk that up to class size. I average 35 students per class, and including advisory period that's 210 students. My understanding is that private schools, along with not having to deal with sped kids and serious behavior problems, have MUCH smaller class sizes. This means more time for actual teaching, not disciplining or having to accomodate many individualized plans. This leads to better lesson plans, more time for going in-depth with students, and more time to grade assignemnts according to a rubric, rather than just multiple choice tests or the like. More teaching time = more teaching going on. More bullshit = all children in the classroom sacrifice a better education.

[MassDem4Life]

97. where do you teach 35 kids per class?

My district averages 21 per class.

Nearby St. Joes averages 26 per class

Also nearby, Phillips Academy/Andover averages 24 per class.

But this has nothing to do with the curriculum designed by the "curriculum coordinator" for the district.

it has nothing to do with the lowered standards, reduced homework demands, lowered expectations, reduced focus upon content.

not to mention the "team" teaching concept. Teachers with an Ed. degree but no content knowledge. 4 years of principles of education do not a teacher make.

most private schools do not take "certified" teachers for a reason. They dont want someone who has spent 4 years being told how to teach, they want a graduate math degreed person to teach math. they want a historian to teach history. they want a literature grad to teach english.

do you see the difference. do you see the difference in results?

[Pavlovs DiOgie]

101. I teach in Las Vegas

and we have been having serious budget problems here (so bad the state supreme court had to intervene). I am opening up a brand new school this year, and there are 40 desks in each classroom because we just don't know what to expect. I heard that they just upped the approved teacher to student ratio to 34, but since that number includes librarians, computer specialists, sped teachers (who have a much smaller teacher/student ratio) that realistically means more than 34 students per class. As of last Friday, the Geography department chair told me that the current numbers of students who have registered mean that he will have 40 kids per class, and more students will register in the next few weeks.

I've been tempted to go to private school, but the lower pay is unreasonable for me. I'm struggling now as it is, and would have to give up my home to take a job for less pay. Actually, I've been seriously considering quitting teaching altogether and becoming a statistic (half of all teachers quit the profession in the 1st 5 years, and now I know why) and going back to my no stress, no hassle, no headache job where I made double what I make now.

[donco6]

68. Special education is only reimbursed at 42% . . .

. . . of total cost. The rest is picked up by operating funds provided locally by the district.

So for that one full-time aide that costs about $15,000 (here in CO at least) we receive $6,300 in reimbursement.

All of those programs you mentioned work somewhat the same way - i.e., partial reimbursement. But should we fail to provide them, we'll have an OCR complaint filed in a week.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

76. Why Catholic schools are cheaper

1. They're partly subsidized by the diocese and the parish where they're located. Since Catholic schools are primarily for Catholic families, and were started as a means of keeping children as loyal Catholics, the church wants them to be affordable.

2. For the most part, they don't take special ed kids, those with learning disabilities, or disruptive kids.

3. Even though they are no longer staffed entirely by nuns (who worked for room and board), they pay less than the public schools and are not required to use certified teachers.

Private schools that are NOT subsidized by churches cost as much as a private college.

[Yupster]

83. If there are 24 kids in a class

and that's probably low, and they get $ 9,123 per kid, that comes to $ 218,952 per classroom of kids.

Well, $ 40,000 goes to the teacher, and they have the best benefits, so maybe add another $ 12,000 so that's $ 52,000, so

Where does the other $ 166,000 + go?

[MassDem4Life]

63. The Fact of the matter is...

that in NYC the chancellors office(superintendent anywhere else) has 6823 employees., while the catholic school district employes only 38.

In NYC only 37% of the total school budget makes it to the classroom(techers pay, assistants pay, books, equip.)

in the Catholic district, 93% makes it to the classroom.

The catholic schools educate the same kids from the same inner city neighborhoods as the public schools, with less difficulties, better grades, better test scores, better discipline, and more college participation.

No social engineering. No social promotion. no feel good wishy washy, new age techniques, just good old basics, and plenty of them.

and they do this at 25-30% of the cost.

The question we should be asking is why cant our public schools do this?

[donco6]

66. I'd like to review your statistics, but don't know where

they came from. Source?

It's highly likely that the NYC administration is top heavy and should be lopped. But without comparisons as to number of students, special ed counts, audits, etc., it's impossible to know for sure.

[MassDem4Life]

71. I got this information as part of

an infomational packet provided to our school budget committee, I sit on that committee.

but the stats are readily avail. Just look at the NYC school district. offices, budget, chancellors office, all it takes is a phone call.

And in my district the middle school for example, has 1 principle, and 3 assistant principles, and 3 curriculum coordinators, and 6 guidance counsellors, and 3 student liasons, and 6 secretaries. and this is just that one schools, and does not count the sped staff.

St. Joe's middle school, has 1 principle, 1 vice principle, 1 secretary, and 2 guidance counsellors.( and they help with college admissions and career decisions, and college financing, NOT PSUEDO-PSYCHOLOGY)

btw, both of those schools have 1050 students.

[donco6]

74. Uh, I'm in Colorado

And I'm not making a long distance call just to satisfy you. If you're planning on being on this board very long, you'll note that it's considered proper etiquette to provide your sources. Otherwise you're wasting our time.

[MassDem4Life]

143. As I said,

I have seen this in print, just because I dont where to find it on the internet does not make it untrue. Just means that if you want to be informed you have to pull your head out of your computer screen and resort to good old fashioned research.

You would not be satisfying me, I could care less what you do, you would be satisfying yourself.

[Bridget Burke]

148. In other words,

You can't support your claims.

[alcuno]

73. Did you read my post?

I can't explain the NYC schools, but I did try to answer your original question. How many students do the NYC schools have compared to the Catholic schools? I'd have to look at the NYC schools total budget to understand where the money is going, but I doubt they are spending 63% of their budget on administration.

I went to a Catholic school and it's not the same as the public schools.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

78. I would agree that there are too many administrators,

but whose fault is that?

Isn't it up to the parents (through the local school boards) to stop the mindless proliferation of administrators?

By the way, private institutions are subject to administrative bloat. My alma mater is a private college, and when I went there in 1968-1972, we had 1700 students, a president, a comptroller, a half-time(!) academic dean, two deans of students, and about two dozen clerical workers.

When I went back to teach there ten years later, they had 1700 students, a president, four vice-presidents, assistants to all these vice-presidents, and highly paid managers for everything. I don't know what kind of sweetheart deal made this possible, although I have my suspicions that the president had buddies on the board of regents.

I repeat, if your school district has too many administrators, raise hell with your school board. Or run for school board yourself.

[Muddleoftheroad]

88. One problem

With your idea of cutting down on admin. It's called the NEA. Most local school boards don't stand a chance against one of the most powerful unions in the nation.

[donco6]

90. Actually, the NEA generally doesn't represent admin.

They are rather strictly teacher-oriented. I doubt strongly that the NEA would advocate for more administration.

But there are administrator unions - just not called the NEA.

[Muddleoftheroad]

94. Bureaucracy

Yes, but the NEA advcates for bureaucracy and that is bad enough.

[alcuno]

123. Back up that statement!

"NEA advocates bureaucracy." First you took a shot at the NEA by suggesting that they are at fault for a top-heavy administration. Then you were told, correctly, that administrators are not in the NEA. However, since the NEA is your "boogie man," you make a statement that just comes out of thin air. BACK IT UP!

Who's to blame for bureaucracy? Are you kidding me? Have you heard of No Child Left Behind? Where did that come from? The same place it all comes from. And no, it's not the NEA.

[Muddleoftheroad]

126. My experience with the NEA

Has been bad -- all bad. I dealt with them in D.C. where they don't want ANYTHING to change. They back up the school system on everything even though they are not educating kids. Hell, last time I heard, D.C. didn't even know how many people were on their payroll.

So when I say they support bureaucracy, that's exactly what I mean.

[alcuno]

132. I'm sorry about your experience witht he DC school, however,

you claimed that NEA had something to do with excessive administration and I can assure you that is not true. First of all, there is a local union in DC under the NEA. That local is the day-to-day representative for the teachers. The job of that local is to make sure that both the teachers and the School Board are following the contract.

During contract negotiations, teachers often point to a top-heavy administration as a source of potential cost-savings to the district. We don't want more administration we want less. To be blunt, the local would see it as possible more money for the teachers.

[Muddleoftheroad]

134. In D.C. EVERY issue is national

There, every interest group gets involved on a national basis. The HQ for the NEA is in D.C. and they get very involved. That is not the local, that is the national office getting involved, making their pitch to both the D.C. government and Congress.

You are probably right that it is not this way elsewhere, but D.C. is a special case.

[alcuno]

139. D.C. is in a terrible bind.

I feel that it needs statehood in order to be able to see to its own affairs.

[Muddleoftheroad]

146. Won't happen anytime soon

What are poor parents supposed to do in the meantime? Just suck it up and not worry that their children aren't learning?

[donco6]

153. If D.C. is going to be our model . . .

. . . then we'll never get anywhere in this discussion.

Frankly, from what I've heard, D.C. schools do suck. Maybe vouchers are the only answer there - I don't know. Here in Colorado, we also allow kids to cross district boundaries to attend any school that has room. Still won't work in D.C., because it would be crossing a District boundary into another state. I wouldn't doubt at all that the union is intractible, buildings are in horrible condition, no materials and supplies, untrained teachers, etc.

But as has been the problem since this country began, the Easterners believe a solution that works for THEM must be the one for EVERYBODY. I don't think that's true at all. I can tell you that OUR buildings are in fine shape. I can tell you that our teachers have all the supplies they could need (within reason, of course). No chalkboards without chalk here. Salaries? We had 2000 applications for 50 positions this year. Training? We have training - tons of training, with filled classes every weekend and many weeknights. We spend our money well, our test scores are rising (though not as quickly as we would like), we have a fund balance to maintain us through this downturn in the economy. In short, Washington is providing us with an answer to a problem we don't have. We've been set up with requirements for arbitrary achievement goals, based on extremely dubious research, that doesn't take into account any element of local control over curriculum.

You know what I say? *If the playing field is level,* I'll take on private schools any day of the week. But don't pretend to have an answer for poor performance in schools when you're letting one team run outside the boundaries, play with 12 men on the field, and none of my teams scores count!

[Muddleoftheroad]

156. One size fits all

Actually, I DON'T believe a one-size fits all solution here. I've been specific and mentioning the bad urban districts. But you are correct, this problem is different around the U.S.

[lazarus]

174. something similar

in my old high school, where my mother works.

Back in my day, there were 500 kids. Admin consisted of a Principal, Vice Principal who also taught a couple of classes, a secretary, and a part time assistant for that secretary.

Now, there are still 500 kids. Principal and VP, who no longer teaches (he's a former coach, so he spends most of the day hanging out over in the gym).

A head secretary with 5, yes, FIVE full time secretaries working under her. Also, a school counselor.

That's my mom. She started as the secretary, worked her ass off doing that job and getting her degrees to be a counselor.

And her job now? Consists primarily of stuff she did as a secretary, only more so. The sheer volume of testing and paperwork being foisted on them in ridiculous.

[flyingfish]

79. Thomas Jefferson- The key to a strong democracy is....

... a strong public education system." Paraphrase, but close enough.
'Nuff said!

[jiacinto]

85. Well that's a tough question

I guess that the key thing is to change how we fund public schools or work to improve the tax bases of low income areas.

[pizzathehut]

106. Liberals are hypocrits on this issue.

I find it absurd that the people most against vouchers, all liberals, send their own kids to private schools. Both the Clintons and Gores sent their own kids to private schools.

Criticism of public schools also comes from the left. Even many liberals are also referring to them as "government schools". And homeschooling is being done by more than just white, religious families now.

[donco6]

115. Just because the Clintons and Gores sent their kids . . .

. . . doesn't mean all "liberals" do.

No one in our office does.

[donco6]

124. So, if liberals are "hypocrits", what does that make you?

A non-liberal? Hmmm?

[alcuno]

125. Why does that make them hypocrites?

Wake up! There are different levels of everything for the wealthy in this country. Just look at healthcare. Haven't you ever seen or heard of some of the private hospitals that provide cadillac care for their paying customers? No one would expect the insurance company to pay for it. The wealthy can write a check.

My parents chose for me to go to a Catholic high school and the idea that anyone other than my parents should have to have paid for it is absurd.

[rman]

127. "all liberals"? you name only two.

i think you'd have a hard time showing that even a significant number of libs send their kids to private schools, not even a majority, let alone "all".

[MassDem4Life]

147. well you could look at Congress

how many Democratic Senators and Congresspersons send their kids to public schools?

I remember reading somewhere, that the number was in single digits, but as I cant remember where I read it, I wont quote the stat.

[Yupster]

155. Jimmy Carter sent his kid

to public school in Washigton, but unhappily he is an exception.

[pizzathehut]

107. Where is the alumni in public schools? They arent welcome.

Last year here in kansas city a local 600 student private school raised $15 million through their alumni association. But just try finding alumni organizations in public schools. They wont even help to organize class reunions. I think the reason is they dont want another pair of eye looking over their shoulders when they make decisions.

[donco6]

114. I can assure you, that is not the reason in my school.

"They wont even help to organize class reunions."

It would be nice, wouldn't it? But when the state is already telling you you don't need any office support staff, and you're already completing the audit single-handedly, as well as filling out all the Consolidated Grant Applications, and reporting data to the state on pupil counts, attendance, suspensions, expulsions, accreditation standards, test scores, transcripts, curriculum development standards, mentoring reports, staffing ratios, etc...

... well, organizing class reunions comes a bit further down the list. But if that's what you want schools to spend their money on, I guess we can try it. Maybe we can cut football . . . nah.

[alcuno]

128. "They won't even help organize class reunions"

Is this a joke? Shouldn't the alumni organization be run by the alumni? Public schools have enough to do without babysitting the alumni association.

[Muddleoftheroad]

131. As an aside

Private schools work very hard at keeping alumni heavily involved. As a result, the alumni also contribute to the schools. It seems a wise practice.

[alcuno]

135. That's because private schools derive their revenues from

tuition plus donations. The job of the private school administration can often be that of a "suck up" to potential donors. It's as much a PR job as anything else. Watch your wallet when nearby.

[Muddleoftheroad]

137. Nothing wrong with that for public schools too

It's a model that works. Public schools can raise funds too, so why NOT work with the alumni?

[alcuno]

142. Public schools are busy working for the public.

We do not have time to be running tea parties. Private schools have vastly lower enrollments and HAVE to suck up for cash. Why do the alumni need all this hand-holding you are talking about? What's wrong with them?

[Muddleoftheroad]

144. It works

Hard to argue with success. Business leaders, alumni all like a little TLC. Yes, school administrations are busy, but if it works, why not try it?

[donco6]

154. I honestly would love to do this.

Not only for the alumni, but for us to track our students and try to gauge their success in life. But the problem is the upfront capital it's going to take to begin to develop the list. Obviously, kids move away after they graduate, and it takes an enormous effort to gather all those addresses to even begin to make an appeal.

If I had the money to devote to it right now, I would advocate for it in a minute. But I just don't - not without killing some other program that we've already determined is beneficial to the kids.

When things turn around, I have no doubt that we will be working on developing an alumni list/newsletter. With that, we will be able to help with class reunions. But until then, it's one of those good ideas that just has to wait in line.

[JanMichael]

145. WTF? Every (Perhaps a tiny # don't) HS in America has reunions.

Well attended reunions.

As to money? Since Public Schools are well, um, Public, why on earth should one be needing $15,000,000?

You lost me...

[pizzathehut]

171. On alumni, I'm not talking about anything big. All our committee...

(class of 1984) asked for was a phone number to be given to a secretary where anyone who calls can get a reference to the committee. And nowadays how about just an entry on a webpage saying "class of 1984, call this number ..." is that so hard?????

Jeesh. I get something in the mail about every 2-3 months or so from the public college I attended trying to keep me informed of whats going on on campus and yes, asking for dough.

What really gets my goat about this is that i brought this up to the district superintendent and he referred me to the districts foundation. I checked it out and they do nothing for alumni. Not even a mention on their webpage.

[ulysses]

165. a thanks to everyone

(on the occasion of what has to be the longest thread I've started in quite some time...)

[donco6]

168. Great Discussion!

I most thoroughly enjoyed it.