Rather than muck up Osg's thread I thought I would post a new thread on the topic.

Recently a friend of mine who is from New Zealand had her son and daughter in law over visiting for Christmas holiday. They stayed a couple of months and this friend of mine is a contract tudor for schools in the area. She has good rapport with one of the elementaries and since her daughter in law is a section leader of grade 2 in New Zealand she arranged to have the daughter in law visit a second grade class here in the states and observe US teaching practices.

The results? She was appalled at the lack of fundamentals taught and noticed that the teachers seem to teach to a few kids in the class while ignoring others. In New Zealand they attend school year round with a 2 week break after every quarter and then a 5 week break around Christmas (their summer). They tell me that a grade 2 student in New Zealand would be the academic equivalent to a 4th grade student in the US. This is baffling and troubling to me. My friend who is the tudor teaches children with learning disabilities or those who are having problems keeping up with the material being taught. She has told me that she sees a disturbing trend happening the past few years that more and more the teachers are teaching only to the PSSA and using memorization techniques for the kids to just pass the test and are not teaching critical thinking skills. She told me that when her own kids moved back to New Zealand with her in the mid 90's the schools there made her kids start 2 grade levels back than what they theoretically should be in.

So my question is; I know that there is at least one teacher here. Can you give your input on this observation? This wasn't observed from just one class but rather the daughter in law visited over a week for 4hours each day. She didn't participate just observed. It's rather appalling to me b/c I know when I was in elementary school we didn't even have PSSAs or state tests; those didn't start till I got to high school.

What is causing this trend and is it true that the more kids that pass the more money the school gets? Is that why memorizing is the preferred technique with this thing? It's really just about funding?

The US is a huge country so making generalizations about a visit to one school may not give you the whole picture. Keep in mind also that the US has a huge population with massive differences in the population, New Zealand has essentially one culture and a very homogeneous population. Much less "at risk" kids, no ELA or bilingual programs and, most importantly, no federal regulations (the extent of which is enough to choke a horse). In my district, which is fairly homogeneous and decently funded, one of our high schools did a survey on first languages. It came up with no less than 50.

You go to a private, well funded school it's probably going to compare favorably to a New Zealand school. A typical suburban school will fall behind. Go to a poorly funded inner city school that struggles to get kids there, clothed and fed and it will be way behind (granted these are gross generalizations just for this point).

Now that being said, I'll be the first to admit education has massive problems in this country What is frequently over looked by some is that, though it has problems internal to itself, it's a fairly good mirror of problems that are occuring with our society in general. Legislation like NCLB has only made the problem worse.

Dear Fild:

I'm about to head to work, but to your three questions: 1) Yes, it's true, and you can think George W. Bush, among others, as he implemented his version of 'No Child Left Behind' in Texas while he was Governor, which explicitly ties funding to performance but which does not fund its own mandates(you can also thank NCLB in part for the loss of recess, music, art, science, and other 'not measurable or measured by standardized test' programs); 2) Yes, and teachers are subject to pressure from their districts, administrators, and principals to 'teach to the test', or else (as a result, elementary students in the Northwest, as I found out at a recent science teacher's conference up there, get *one hour* of science instruction per week); and 3) Funding, and those tags that come with standardized test performance scores ('exemplary'), etc. Teachers have been complaining about this (at least in Texas) for over a decade, but have, at least under the previous administration, been tarred as 'agitators from the teacher's union only out to save their incompetent asses'.

I'd also like to add that the decline in many (non-tested) programs predated NCLB in that there has been an increasing reluctance to spend property taxes to pay for such programs (typically education funding gets slashed as kind of an unintended consequence of the oh so popular property tax reductions or caps, a la Proposition 13 in California) and funding that has come in in recent years has gone to pay for the mushrooming layers of administration and bureaucracy needed to 'oversee and improve performance'. Expect the gutting of school programs to get worse in the near future as a result of the housing bubble, or more precisely its recent bursting; all over the country, as foreclosures rack up and housing prices decline; hefty drops in tax revenue are going to force schools to make even tougher choices.

What we see in the US is the predictable, and sad, results of applying a manufacturing model (and a 'supply side' economic model at that) to education. The previous administration (and more to the point, its ideological masters) had no love for public education and tried to defund it and divert as many resources as possible to private, overwhelmingly Christian church-based, schools. It also goes without saying that some of these individuals, including our previous president, had no idea what the actual function of education is (hint: it isn't 'to train people so they can get good jobs', although even that would be a vast improvement over what we have now, which serves no end well). As someone who now has to deal with the results of the tragic injustice that has been perpetrated on the current generation of teenagers and young adults, I can say that it makes me very angry and fearful for our future. I can only hope that our new President, having both a formidable mind and a healthy respect for the power of education to grow, or stunt, human lives and potential, will scrap, or at least heavily remodel and properly fund, NCLB and start looking at public education as the critically important 'infrastructure development' tool that it is.

Regards,
Nydia

The US is a huge country so making generalizations about a visit to one school may not give you the whole picture.

I think that's a good point.

The discrepancy between the high school I went to and the ones here where I live now is just amazing. The high school my girlfriend (from this area) went to is better equipped, funded, and staffed than the small, 4 year colleges that most of my high school friends slummed off to.

This is due in large part to tax revenues - the lion's share of school funding is paid for via *local* property taxes and so wealthy districts... quel surprise! get better equipped and funded schools, while those in poor districts languish. In an attempt to address this in Texas, during Ann Richards' term as Governor here, the much-reviled 'Robin Hood' tax plan for schools was implemented, wherein property taxes from all state districts were pooled and redistributed (to a certain extent) so that they could meet a minimum expenditure per pupil (to great effect in South Texas, but unfortunately, physical facilities were so bad in most of these areas that most of the additional revenue went to buildings). The last two administrations since then (Bush, Perry) have 1) tried to get 'Robin Hood' declared unconstitutional (successfully, it had to go back for modification) and 2) provide loopholes wherein wealthy districts can raise funds exempt from the plan.

Some interesting background on why Texas ended up with such a system here:

In 1984, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund filed suit against state Commissioner of Education William Kirby on behalf of the Edgewood Independent School District in San Antonio, citing discrimination against students in poor school districts. The plaintiffs charged that the state's methods of funding public schools violated the Texas state constitution, which required the state to provide an efficient public school system.

School finance lawsuits must take place in state court, since the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1973 that education is not a fundamental right protected by the U.S. Constitution (San Antonio v. Rodriguez). The case, Edgewood Independent School District v. Kirby, eventually went to the Texas Supreme Court, which unanimously sided with Edgewood.

I suspect that most citizens are *not* aware that public education is not a fundamental and protected right under the *federal* constitution, as it's something we've taken for granted throughout the 20th century. As a result, standards and funding levels vary widely by state (and to my knowledge all of the states have compulsory education on *some* level enshrined in their constitutions, correct me if I am in error) and even by municipality.

I don't necessarily disagree with the distribution.

I, of course, back school vouchers. Where do you all stand?

Ok so the consensus is that it's b/c we're so large and are catering to a diverse group of people? I guess that makes sense but it doesn't change the fact that schools are teaching to the test and memorization and not teaching critical thinking.

I guess I should mention my New Zealand friend here works within the school district and some of what I'm saying is also her observations as well. She works with elementary and middle school kids and that covers about 6 schools in our district so she doesn't see just one school or class. Her daughter in law was the one who saw just one school/class.

I guess I never realized what effect NCLB has had on education. It's a damn shame really. Schools teach a test and don't teach... well public schools anyway. Bleh what a mess, maybe education shouldn't be public and gov't funded anymore? What is the solution to get smarter minds graduating instead of ones that can regurgitate facts?

I believe in a strong federally funded public education system.

So. What is left that Dubbyah didn't fuck up?

Most Republicans do back a voucher system because of a misunderstanding of the education system and the general condition of this country's infrastructure.

As long as ALL federal regulations are applied to private schools, including NCLB, just as they are in public schools, I'd be all for vouchers. That means no private school can refuse ANY student regardless of academics, criminal record, learning disability, primary language, handicaps, etc. ...and don't even try to tell me how much better private schools are than public ones.

It will never happen so vouchers will only further erode an already weak system if not destroy education for middel and lower incomes entirely. The only people that will benefit from a voucher systems are the upper classes who already send their kids to private schools.

The bridge by my house lummus.... wait his administration was part of the group that started teh squandering of 10billion with B dollars of texas road improvement money on studies that were not legal due to the funds they used and now want to make everything tolls here. He did not screw up on making a one hot set of twins so that is it!

Most Republicans do back a voucher system because of a misunderstanding of the education system and the general condition of this country's infrastructure.

As long as ALL federal regulations are applied to private schools, including NCLB, just as they are in public schools, I'd be all for vouchers. That means no private school can refuse ANY student regardless of academics, criminal record, learning disability, primary language, handicaps, etc. ...and don't even try to tell me how much better private schools are than public ones.

It will never happen so vouchers will only further erode an already weak system if not destroy education for middel and lower incomes entirely. The only people that will benefit from a voucher systems are the upper classes who already send their kids to private schools.

I see you have no grasp of the school voucher program.. Why is it a bad thing if I feel my school is failing at teaching my child should I be forced to continue that poor education. I should be allowed to send my child to a school that is willing to compete for my students education. Allow the market to dictate what schools are working and what are not.

I see you have no grasp of the school voucher program.. Why is it a bad thing if I feel my school is failing at teaching my child should I be forced to continue that poor education. I should be allowed to send my child to a school that is willing to compete for my students education. Allow the market to dictate what schools are working and what are not.

Because education is not a tradeable commodity and the entire country benefits from raising the overall level of education more than allowing rich people to send their kids to a small number of good schools while the general case flounders.

Education has more in common with public health -- it's not an individual that matters, it's the whole population.

I guess we will have to agree to disagree. I just don't see it that way at all... Now commence to calling me names.

Allow the market to dictate what schools are working and what are not.

Schools for the majority of the country's student age population, in theory, are considered to be in the public domain, and not driven by market forces. Granted that's not really the case since bad neighborhoods also usually mean bad schools due to how they are locally funded from property taxes. Cities like Flint probably don't even have a working school system anymore. That kind of stuff is a major black eye to the US as a whole and makes us no better than the shit hole nations we preach to be so much better than. Even so, you can probably get a good education for your children in Kenya or Haiti if you have enough money to spend. What you are advocating is the same principle, Osg. It only serves to create a two tiered society.

We should have each just posted the Opponent and Proponents section from the wiki and this is pretty much where it is headed. I am totally fine with a free market approach to my daughters education.

I see you have no grasp of the school voucher program.. Why is it a bad thing if I feel my school is failing at teaching my child should I be forced to continue that poor education. I should be allowed to send my child to a school that is willing to compete for my students education. Allow the market to dictate what schools are working and what are not.

What do you mean market? I sure hope you're not meaning some kind of economic tie to a school and last time I checked schools are not for profit. I'm very confused what you mean.

You're comment about being to choose which school your kid can go to if you're current school isn't up to your standard would be valid if as others have stated, the school doesn't get to turn away students based on their non-standard standards. It's like getting something for nothing in the school's case.

I think private schools should not get vouchers if they don't follow the same set of standards but then I think our education system is all foobared and it should be federal system and not all these seperate entities (states) doing their own thing. As Malse says education benefits the people as a whole, basic education not higher learning. That you can choose on your own and pay for it. And even if you want to attend a private school sure go ahead but you shouldn't get something extra b/c you choose to do so. If you want to go there pay your dues, the gov't shouldn't doing it for you.

Well, I have never met a Republican that didn't live in a good school district.

What is the solution to get smarter minds graduating instead of ones that can regurgitate facts?

That's a loaded question. Keep in mind, though NCLB has hurt education, it still had a myriad of problems to begin with. Mine in particular is inefficiently run that it virtually hemorrhages money...NCLB only made it worse it didn't cause the problem. The over-ridding cultural problem surrounding public education, IMO, is how it's not looked as important and people that are in education are, in general, looked as a less capable than say those in the business world or other pursuits. Hence the popular term, "those who can't, teach". The rich, and let's face it they are who run this country, just pull their kids out of public schools and then bitch they still have to pay taxes to support it (why most of them want vouchers, btw). They disregard the fact that a solid performing educational system for all classes is the foundation on which this country's future will be built. A good first step would be to revoke NCLB.

I am totally fine with a free market approach to my daughters education.

...and why shouldn't you be, you have the means to BUY her an education. Fuck those who don't!!!:devil

ROFL.. You have not seen my pay check have you?

Now why would the rich want the unwashed masses, who exist only to give them all their meager wages, want them to get an education and usurp their position in society? Let alone pay taxes in support of such an endeavor? In the global market, all the corporate world needs is a base of consumers to keep on pumping in all that cash. The more ignorant they are, the better. Intelligent employees can be can be hired from anywhere in the world from better financed school systems, thus leeching off other countries tax proceeds.

This all went to shit when the majority of those in control put their own greed and ambition over having some respect of the place and people that helped them get where they are.

ROFL.. You have not seen my pay check have you?

Nope, but based on what you've said, and where you live...and your party...I'm betting your better off than most.

I paid a little extra money to put my son in a charter high school. Smaller classes, no gang issues and a focus on arts and sciences.

That should be an option for everyone. I did that without vouchers and am fully supportive of the charter high school program they have here in Utah.

We should have each just posted the Opponent and Proponents section from the wiki and this is pretty much where it is headed. I am totally fine with a free market approach to my daughters education.

Are you totally fine with the free market denying any education at all to approximately 30% of the US population?

Most Republicans do back a voucher system because of a misunderstanding of the education system and the general condition of this country's infrastructure.

As long as ALL federal regulations are applied to private schools, including NCLB, just as they are in public schools, I'd be all for vouchers. That means no private school can refuse ANY student regardless of academics, criminal record, learning disability, primary language, handicaps, etc. ...and don't even try to tell me how much better private schools are than public ones.

It will never happen so vouchers will only further erode an already weak system if not destroy education for middel and lower incomes entirely. The only people that will benefit from a voucher systems are the upper classes who already send their kids to private schools.


Wow, good to see all the responses to the thread! I just got in from lecture and had time to sit down at the computer...

I've quoted Ailwon's post in its entirety because it captures what is wrong with the voucher system in a nutshell (although there are other issues as well, such as whether that school is actually teaching science and history :) ), and others have further explained it. If vouchers were actually implemented with the lip-service *stated* goals in mind, and alternative schools held fully accountable, I would not have an objection to them in principle. Charter schools are another way to address individual student needs and Dallas has a decent charter school system, although such things should not come to the detriment of those in general education.

A decent, comprehensive general education (through what *used* to be considered an 8th grade level at least) should be considered just as vital to preserving the integrity of the nation as roads and bridges, food safety and public health, and clean air and water, for neglecting the education of our populace will lead us to ruin as surely as the want of any of those other things. 'Comprehensive' doesn't mean 'three subjects we can reduce to standardized tests, and output from those assessments'; it must include literature, history and government, science, art, music, physical education, and, yes, even recess - it must address all of the needs of the growing mind and inculcation necessary to produce functioning adult citizens capable of full participation in the society.

I know you're all going to be shocked, but there was a major study published this week in Pediatrics which showed that primary school students who got at least 15 minutes of recess per day displayed much lower rates of behavioral problems than those who got no or minimal recess, and those that got *no* recess were overwhelmingly concentrated in poor and urban areas. Who knew? ;).

Finally, while we're on the subject of vouchers and private schools (of which we have not a few crackpot ultra-Christian schools here in Texas which are no better than some of those extremist madrassas in Pakistan, part of why Bush was pushing so hard for vouchers in the first place), while we're on the issue of setting minimum educational standards, I'd like to see meaningful standards set for home schooling *and the individuals who provide homeschool education*. Can't obtain certification, or meet the requirements for alternative certification, for the subjects/grade level you wish to teach your kids in? Then you have no business shortchanging *their* future for the sake of your beliefs...

I realize that treads on the same line that forcing parents to provide necessary medical treatment that goes against religious beliefs does, and many may see it as an assault on personal freedoms, (and I think there should be limited exemptions made for very remote areas, although the intertubes are coming to the rescue in this regard), but a growing population of people are using 'homeschooling' as an excuse for preventing their children from being 'contaminated' by such things as the free exchange of ideas or exposure to diversity.

Regards,
Nydia

Nope, but based on what you've said, and where you live...and your party...I'm betting your better off than most.


LOL...most of the republican base is the uneducated low information crew who don't realize how bad of a fucking they get from the party.

It's rather appalling to me b/c I know when I was in elementary school we didn't even have PSSAs or state tests; those didn't start till I got to high school.

What is causing this trend and is it true that the more kids that pass the more money the school gets? Is that why memorizing is the preferred technique with this thing? It's really just about funding?


Being a tad older than you, Fildien, I have been ranting about the same issue since my 24 year old son was in elementary school. History is no longer anything I would recognize, having been rewritten several times to be more palatable to certain groups. Civics classes are virtually non-existent. Kids are apparently only taught what they need to pass the test to advance to the next grade.

And yes, funding is the focus of those in the big ofices, who do the trickle down directives to the teachers, who are hand-cuffed mostly in what they can do.

And now, I will read the rest of the thread and see if anyone else echoes my sentiments.

Cranky and just got off work. Why do we always have education threads on the weeks when I'm busy?

When I first started teaching I was adamantly against sending my own children - which I don't actually have yet - to any private or charter school, believing in the power of the educational system. Now, I'd probably either take my kids to my school, which is nowhere near the low achieving schools where I live, or I'd put them in a private school.

We can blame GWB, and I do, but there are other factors contributing to the US educational system. Just as one example, when we tried to go to a calendar year that would match up with what research suggests is more beneficial for students, as well as cheaper on the operating budget, the parents in my district flipped out because they didn't want to give up on their vacation times. Almost without fail, struggling students who bring down test scores are linked with some sort of family issue - the most annoying being parents who won't kick thier kids out of bed in the morning and force them to go to school.

The real kick to remember is that our schools take everyone, and are poorly funded. The popular comparision from the Omg, our schools suck! crowd is to well funded educational facilities in countries where low performers are dropped.

A prick at a recent convention started bragging to me about his private school. He was boasting about his school's test scores, and how they had 100% honors classes. Any student who didn't make the grade was cut. Well duh - if I could drop my failing student's, I'd have a perfect record too.

Dropping the failing students is a poor solution, both from our schools and the system as a whole. Where do you suppose those dropouts are going to go, in a nation like this? An educated population is not a bad thing.

"Education is not a commodity, it is a resource." - some ed expert who's name I've forgotten.

Property taxes only go so far in funding districts. In my state, the legislature limits the amount of money going to districts with high property taxes. My district is in one of the more affluent parts of the city, and we have one of the lowest salary rates.

I'm mixed on issues such as vouchers. On one hand I can't fault any parent for wanting to send their student to a quality school. At the same time, every voucher takes needed money away from schools. Especially right now, when schools are suffering in the recession along with everyone else. We're looking at layoffs possibly going back to the last three years of hires, which means class sizes are likely to hit the 50-60 mark in some classes next year. Good luck getting an education in that environment.

Oh, and our asshole higher ups just gave themselves a significant raise.

LOL...most of the republican base is the uneducated low information crew who don't realize how bad of a fucking they get from the party.


Ahh yes. Typical liberal elitism rears it's ugly head.

the most annoying being parents who won't kick thier kids out of bed in the morning and force them to go to school
This was one of the biggest problems I had with high school: the early start time. A 7am start time is inconsistent with teenagers' circadian rhythms (particularly during the winter), and the resulting grogginess for the first few classes makes it difficult to learn much.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/09/AR2006010901561.html

Heh, I remember being up at 3:30 AM in Basic Training at 19 years old. I'm sure telling my Drill Sergeant the reason I can't learn what you are teaching me is because my circadian rhythms are out of alignment due to the early wake up time would have earned me an extra set of push-ups ....

Kids are resilient, and malleable, given the proper discipline. It's kind of hard to instill that when the parents don't have any...

They can do it, and parents need to make their kids do it - but what Palarran posted is another example of the system ignoring well known research. We also do most high stakes testing in the morning, go figure.

How much thinking did your drill sergeant expect you to do at 3:30 in the morning? There's a difference between being physically awake and mentally alert. High school students may be physically present in class, but not able to learn effectively.

Having to be awake at 3:30 for exercises and other physical conditioning is completely unrelated.

We also do most high stakes testing in the morning, go figure.

I took calculus at 7am. Big mistake. I ended up taking the class again at a time later in the day and did vastly better.

How much thinking did your drill sergeant expect you to do at 3:30 in the morning? There's a difference between being physically awake and mentally alert. High school students may be physically present in class, but not able to learn effectively.

Having to be awake at 3:30 for exercises and other physical conditioning is completely unrelated.

Alert enough to dressed in PT uniforms, have your flashlight and reflective vests on, execute D&C commands, perform as a road guard for the platoon as it ran, ect.

Yes, it wasn't Calculus, but it did require a certain level of thinking beyond processing oxygen...

Perhaps P.E. should be taught in the morning, then?

It might be an improvement (especially when it can be held outside, since sunlight promotes wakefulness) but it's typically not practical for an entire school to have gym class at the same time. It wouldn't be an efficient use of fields and gym equipment, not to mention instructors.

Why don't we hand each of the nice little boys a girls a cookie and pat them on the behind and tell them what good little boys and girls they are and everyone is a winner and gets a gold star for the day.. Jesus!

Alert enough to dressed in PT uniforms, have your flashlight and reflective vests on, execute D&C commands, perform as a road guard for the platoon as it ran, ect.

Yes, it wasn't Calculus, but it did require a certain level of thinking beyond processing oxygen...

Perhaps P.E. should be taught in the morning, then?


man...road guards...the things that come back to memory...

This is about time management, not coddling; students learn far more efficiently when they are awake. Efficiency is good, yes?

I often discuss this subject with our CIO and others and one thing always becomes extremely clear that education absolutely does not do in this country....

DO what is best for the kids.

Not to long ago our district changed the start time for Middle School to come in later to better match their best times for learning (as Palaran talked about). Granted they had an ulterior motive of trying to better utilize our few remaining bus drivers, we had a huge shortage at the time. They outcry was nothing short of amazing, the teacher union going ballistic, parent groups turning out in droves agianst it. Eventually they backed down moved the time back by about half...none of those groups wanted to hear that it was best for the kids education. Year round school is proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that it's better for education....we won't adopt because of the teacher union and parental pressure. it goes back to my main point, at this time time Education should be one of the most important issues in this country, but we spend more time bickering over a completely unimportant issue like abortion.

Os, I am 100% in agreement with you on vouchers, but I re-iterate, ALL schools must play by the same rules including private schools....and that will NEVER happen. Public schools are such a great disadvantage against private schools they can not be compared in any way shape or form.

Kick down the salaries of everyone above the rank of principal too - I just found out that in a major recession, our district leadership is making three or four times what teachers make (and I'm talking secretaries, not even CFOs or superintendents), while the real big cheeses just gave themselves a salary bonus equal to about three or four teacher salaries a year. We're going to lay off teachers, and these clowns get a raise.

I'm routinely told I shouldn't complain about my pay because I'm supposed to teach for the love of it, and there's some truth in that. But since I actually execute the primary purpose of the school, why are district officials who never see students and have never worked in a classroom paid 8 or 9 times my salary, plus bonuses? Your tax dollars at work - and then the schools are shocked when they can't get overrides to pass.

This hasn't been about what's best for the kids for a long time.

Wow, Kanyli I wonder if your fellow neighbors, parents, and other teachers know this? Perhaps they should? I'd certainly be raising a stink in some way if it's true.


/off topic


ROAD GUARD! POST!

There were a couple of opinion pieces about it in the paper. Honestly, the socio-economic gap between teachers and the community where I work is so large, most people fall into that wealthy category that doesn't actually understand how little other people are paid. To put that another way - a teacher's salary here is quite livable, first year teachers make around $28k - $32k. Most of the community makes several times that, enough to the point where they are living in a different world entirely. One of our active parents said something the other day, and while I forget what the comment was it made me realize that the man had no idea the gap between us. I'm not sure the community realizes what those salary bonuses equate to.

School districts are a wierd, powerful political group, very different from any other groups. There are several districts in this nation without any schools, because no one was able to do away with the school board when schools closed down. The waste at the district level is on par with some of these big companies begging for handouts, and both the effect on the lower end workers and the taxpayers is the same.

Uh, which is a convoluted way of saying - I sadly don't think the community cares.

I think public schools will be next on the list asking for federal bailouts.

To put that another way - a teacher's salary here is quite livable, first year teachers make around $28k - $32k.

I dunno about the rest of you, but I'd have a very, very hard time living on that. And I wouldn't be anywhere near where I am today without my education, particularly a Mrs. Frisch who taught me 10th grade English and got me involved in our student television station.

$32k nets a decent apartment and lifestyle in Arizona. Add my wife's salary and we have a decent home on the outskirts of the city. I know of schools out east that start around $50k, but the cost of living is considerably more.

Not that I wouldn't take a higher salary, or think teachers should be paid more.

Our education is outdated, outmoded and not preparing students in the way they should be.

The problem is that we are using an antiquated system. Think 150 years ago. Almost every American, who actually went to school, unless they were from wealth, only went a few years, in a small school house, with multiple age levels. The stress here was on the agricultural life. Students learned what was necessary to prepare them for what society needed them to be.

This changed around WW2 for the most part as the US pretty much stopped being a rural, agricultural nation and became an industrial powerhouse. The foundations of public education changed. The goal was to produce citizens who could work in an industrial setting and have enough education to read a blueprint. Think of the design of schools. It is pretty much an assembly line. For small increments of time, different courses of knowledge are bolted onto an individual before they move onto the next station.

That has stopped working because we no longer are an industrial nation.

A new way of approaching education has to be seized upon. One that acutely prepares students to function in the post industrial, tech, highly competitive world they are going to find themselves in.

Are Charter schools the answer? No. The very idea behind charter schools is self defeating. There is no central, unifying theme. Additionally, in a world that is increasingly demanding more knowledge of others and the ability to interact with widely different people, charter schools have a segregation effect. People will go to school with people like themselves. People in their neighborhood, of their same race, of their same religion and for the most part of their socio-economic class. The idea of charter schools is pretty much akin to the educational system of Great Britain in the 19th century. You will create a very very well educated 5 -10%, but create a tremendous gap with the rest of the population. This 5 -10% will be static and create a pseudo nobility where your success in life is predetermined by your social standing.

Public schools cannot be for profit enterprises if they idea is universal education. This works on the university level because the higher education is a choice and students are free to fail out or not go. But that baseline requirement of education for a democratic society to continue is, and should be, mandatory and be a vehicle for all people to defy their social status and give universal, equal opportunity.

One of the best things ive seen in a long time that will completely revamp education is: http://blogs.zdnet.com/Google/?p=121

The implications of this on education and providing a new kind of learning style to students is pretty exciting.

Wow that's pretty drastic when you compare it a friend of mine who is making $65k as a teacher in one of the smaller districts in my county. She has been teaching about 10yrs now. 28-32k seems just above min. wage? That's terrible and pathetic that a teacher is paid such a wage to teach our future. I don't know what your school taxes and property taxes are like there but I can tell you I pay thru the damn nose here :(

What are your thoughts on year round school teachers? Would it help or hinder?

yea..

I make 58 a year in my 5th year with out my 6th year degree.

Some states pay shit, some pay decent.

Llearic hit it on the nail (although the solution link didn't work for me). We're out of date, and ignoring research in many fronts. I try really hard not to whine about pay, but there is a sound argument to be made for increasing pay to bring in more qualified teachers as well.

I think our problem is much simpler than the methods used - we as a nation do not prioritize or value education. Vacations, holidays, summer break, funding, and just about everything else in life takes priority. Not to mention, schools pitching fits over NCLB and whatever else only serves to continue to lower the public's opinion.

A friend did some informal research for a paper she wrote, hypothesizing about why students were reaching high school and middle school without the necessary skills. Her hypothesis, which her non-technical research supported, was that teaching used to be a high paying job for women way back when, and we had the best. Now that women can get real jobs, too many elementary teachers are just there for the fun of playing with the kids, and aren't comfortable themselves with advanced language, science, and math.

I'd gladly go year round for a bump in pay. Trying to find part time jobs in the summer is just silly. If I don't work, I get bored, and the extra pay is nice.

Robin hood and his friends in my Texas education system was a joke after transfering schools. My H.S. you wouldnt want to walk into today.

I am all for vouchers, even thou I bought in a superb rated school system when I purchased my house to keep them from going to a Austin system school.

Teaching to pass multiple tests is something I remember fondly in non ap classes. I wouldnt want to be a teacher.

Its amazing how much more scrutiny goes into coaches than a teacher.

I think I've said this before, so forgive me - when I was hired I was interviewed by the principal and the AP, and that's it, and hired in one day. I see about 150 students a day, give or take. When the new football coach was hired a committee had to be formed of parents, community leaders, and staff to carefully select the perfect candidate over a couple of months, who sees only the football team, and has several assistants. That's the problem, check where community priorities are.

egads don't get me started on coaches.

I think I posted a while back how our football coach of some 30yrs was forced to resign b/c he missed a game due to his son's wedding rehersal. In my home town there is Football and then everything else. If they would have been having a winning season they would not have done that to the coach. Fortunately many in my hometown went apapletic (sp) and there is still a stink going on down there. Quite a few new school board members too. It disgusts me, and I'm one of those kids who would not have gotten to college were it not for athletic scholarships and I'm still disgusted about the role sports have in the education system. Oy, probably should be a seperate thread sorry =\