Are some schools failing due to lack of money or environment

[thyme4change]

In good schools, bad teachers are ostracized until they quit.  It is pretty easy to make someone so unhappy that they will eventually move on.  

[Deleted]

Apr 10, 2013 10:14:48 GMT -5 jkapp said:

Apr 10, 2013 10:06:21 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Cultural change: Pay teachers what top notch professionals in other fields are paid so you have people who can teach advanced math classes well.

And when schools/kids are still failing, then what?  Start paying bonuses in hopes that will change something?

How about finding a teacher whom has a passion for teaching. utopian idea perhaps.  

[thyme4change]

I agree - when it comes to grade schools, and even high schools - you don't need the best mathematician to teach almost all students.  You need someone who is very good at inspiring people, and getting them to do the work themselves.

[thyme4change]

I think tenure shouldn't exist in non-college settings.  (I don't know about college.  I have no opinion.)

I have found the best teachers are the fresh ones.  In their first 5-10 years.  After that, they get all burned out and are "over it."  I would love to see a culture where every teacher has to prove that they are still passionate about their situation every 8 years.  

[happyhoix]

Where my SIL lives, a higher than average income area, the local PTO fund raisers produce a LOT of money, and these are used to pay for 'extras' at the school - more teacher's aids, more equipment and books, field trips, teachers for non standard elective classes.

At the poorer school systems in the same system, they're cutting PE teachers, foreign language teachers, all the teacher's aids, they're making due without supplies and old books.

So yes if your kid goes to a school in a wealthier area, there will be more 'stuff' that will enhance their experience.

[formerroomate99]

Some people value education and hard work.  Some don't.  Which group of people are more likely to be poor?

When the Irish, Italians, Poles, etc came to this country, in the 1800's, they lived in the kind of poverty that doesn't exist in this country anymore.  There was no medicaid, WIC, foodstamps, or shelters for abused women.  Fathers died all the time in work related accidents and family members died of things like TB.  But the Catholic schools were able to educate these kids on a shoestring budget, many of whom had parents who didn't speak English, because they had parental support.  Nobody wanted to argue with a nun.  And it's not like these nuns were necessairly gifted teachers.  Going into the convent was basically the only option for a woman who didn't want to get married. 

[billisonboard]

Apr 10, 2013 11:06:23 GMT -5 thyme4change said:

I think tenure shouldn't exist in non-college settings.  (I don't know about college.  I have no opinion.)

I have found the best teachers are the fresh ones.  In their first 5-10 years.  After that, they get all burned out and are "over it."  I would love to see a culture where every teacher has to prove that they are still passionate about their situation every 8 years.  

Prove passion?

[thyme4change]

Sure - it is pretty easy to see if someone actually wants to be there or not.  They could have to do a quick presentation about a new method they want to start using, or talk about what works well, and where they hope to improve.  I swear some people just pull out the same ol' tired lesson plan year after year, and just scream out whatever the most common name is and hope that no one noticed that they don't know the difference between one kid and another.

[Deleted]

Apr 10, 2013 12:00:34 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Apr 10, 2013 11:06:23 GMT -5 thyme4change said:

I think tenure shouldn't exist in non-college settings.  (I don't know about college.  I have no opinion.)

I have found the best teachers are the fresh ones.  In their first 5-10 years.  After that, they get all burned out and are "over it."  I would love to see a culture where every teacher has to prove that they are still passionate about their situation every 8 years.  

Prove passion?

You can able to see it through  your child.  I think, thyme has a very good point.

[billisonboard]

I don't disagree with the concept.  I personally lived it and made the choice to get out of the classroom due to my lack of passion in what I was doing.

Always   the details.

There are the economic realities of modern life that make the proposal problematic.  Will administrators teachers who are more expensive salary wise?  What does the 24 year veteran teacher do at 46 when she is dumped?  Are we dumping teachers right before eligibility for retirement due to "lack of passion" or to save the money?

[thyme4change]

Maybe teachers should think what the rest of us think - that we are responsible for our own retirement and our own career paths and the chances that we will be at one organization and one job for our whole career is not possible in the new normal.  Maybe a teacher in her 3rd year shouldn't be paid significantly less than one in her 20th year - because the value of those two people might be the same.  If they are both educating a class of 25 10 year olds, why should one be paid more?  

If after 24 years you don't show enough passion, then you need to move on.  Bills - you have asked the same question I'm asking myself.  If I have no drive left for my job, even though I have 21 years into this career path, what should I do at 44 years old?  Shouldn't an employer have the right to have an enthusiastic and skilled worker?  If I'm not that, do I deserve my job, just because it is the only skill set I have?

[Deleted]

Apr 10, 2013 12:17:54 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Always   the details.

There are the economic realities of modern life that make the proposal problematic.  Will administrators teachers who are more expensive salary wise?  What does the 24 year veteran teacher do at 46 when she is dumped?  Are we dumping teachers right before eligibility for retirement due to "lack of passion" or to save the money?

Yes, I agree.

It will be very hard to come up with right balances to meet the challenge.
Administrators, teacher, parents,  all get together and  brainstorm the idea for betterment of the children.

But without the passion and knowledge of reaching out,  it's hard to connect with young mind. 
Especially when young mind's ready to soak up all the information.

[The Captain]

Apr 10, 2013 10:06:21 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Apr 10, 2013 9:57:38 GMT -5 Politically_Incorrect12 said:

Cultural change: Pay teachers what top notch professionals in other fields are paid so you have people who can teach advanced math classes well.

This is a very sound idea.  I am all for it as long as the teachers agree to be held accountable for their results like other top notch professionals...

--- oh wait....that will NEVER happe.

[thyme4change]

it's hard to connect with young mind. 
Especially when young mind's ready to soak up all the information.

I might argue the opposite is true.  A very hungry mind can learn with a mediocre teacher.  Not learn exceptionally well, but will learn something.  Whereas a young mind who has other struggles and competing priorities needs a very passionate and hard working teacher to bring that child in.[/span]

[The Captain]

Apr 10, 2013 11:50:06 GMT -5 formerroomate99 said:

Some people value education and hard work.  Some don't.  Which group of people are more likely to be poor?

When the Irish, Italians, Poles, etc came to this country, in the 1800's, they lived in the kind of poverty that doesn't exist in this country anymore.  There was no medicaid, WIC, foodstamps, or shelters for abused women.  Fathers died all the time in work related accidents and family members died of things like TB.  But the Catholic schools were able to educate these kids on a shoestring budget, many of whom had parents who didn't speak English, because they had parental support.  Nobody wanted to argue with a nun.  And it's not like these nuns were necessairly gifted teachers.  Going into the convent was basically the only option for a woman who didn't want to get married. 

The Catholic schools are STILL doing it on a shoestring budget.  In my area the public spending per student is 3 times what the Catholic school tuition (for K-8 at least, I haven't looked into HS yet).  Our classes test at 1.5 levels above grade on average. 

Some people claim parents only send "the cream of the crop" to private school.  Ummm, yea - you know at 5yo that Johnny is a superstar so you decide to send him to private school .  Over 90% of our kids who start at kindergarten graduate 8th grade with their class.

The issue comes down to discipline and parental involvment.  No amount of money is going to be able to change those influences (or lack thereof).

Catholic HS's have a graduation rate of 99% nationally.  Public HS?  73%.  I can guarantee that every parent who is paying for private tuition has a vested interest in making sure they get their money's worth.  For the poor kids in the public school system, it's free anyway so who cares if you waste it?

In my opinion it is largely due to the HOME environment.  Now we all know this is not always the case, but if mom or dad don't care about school, then why should the kid?

[happyhoix]

Interesting article on why Finnland's kids consistantly earn the highest test scores internationally.

One big reason (I think) is teaching is a highly valued profession there, and you have to rank in the top ten % of your college class to apply for a masters degree in education to be able to teach. Teaching also pays extremely well there.

The school system also focuses on the students that are lagging and provide them with extra help - about 30% of the elementary school kids receive some kind of extra help.

“Children from wealthy families with lots of education can be taught by stupid teachers,” Louhivuori said, smiling. “We try to catch the weak students. It’s deep in our thinking.”

Read more: www.smithsonianmag.com/people-places/Why-Are-Finlands-Schools-Successful.html#ixzz2Q5lSRWY5
Follow us: @smithsonianmag on Twitter

[The Captain]

Apr 10, 2013 14:54:07 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

Interesting article on why Finnland's kids consistantly earn the highest test scores internationally.

One big reason (I think) is teaching is a highly valued profession there, and you have to rank in the top ten % of your college class to apply for a masters degree in education to be able to teach. Teaching also pays extremely well there.

The school system also focuses on the students that are lagging and provide them with extra help - about 30% of the elementary school kids receive some kind of extra help.

“Children from wealthy families with lots of education can be taught by stupid teachers,” Louhivuori said, smiling. “We try to catch the weak students. It’s deep in our thinking.”

Read more: www.smithsonianmag.com/people-places/Why-Are-Finlands-Schools-Successful.html#ixzz2Q5lSRWY5
Follow us: @smithsonianmag on Twitter

Teacher pay has very little to do with it.  Comparing Finland to the US is about as appropriate as comparing a pea to a hand grenade. 

Finland is pretty much homogeneous.  95% of the population is native born and there is a 100% literacy rate.  A majority of the families only have one child. 
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Finland

In addition, before you are allowed to become a permanent citizen you must speak the language, be self supporting (or have a reason to be entitled to support, and have been a resident for two years.  Again, not even closely comparable to the US.

www.migrationinformation.org/feature/display.cfm?ID=825

Show me one study where it is proved that simply throwing more money at the problem will cause a significant improvement.  In response I challenge you to watch "dropout nation" where a special school with almost limited resources still could not attain significant graduation rates.

[happyhoix]

Comparing Finland to the US is about as appropriate as comparing a pea to a hand grenade.

Finland wasn't always where they are today. They had a push for educational reform in the 1960's, which focused on 3 things  - 1) develop of a national curriculum with students held to rigrous standards, 2) dramatic changes in teacher certifications and 3) controls from their federal government that evaluated the school level learning and teaching.

This 1960's reform is what pushed them from 'average' to 'great.'

Generally when you are trying to find a good model on how to do something, you look at other successful models to see what worked for other people, and evaluate whether or not that might work for you. So yes, while Finland isn't the US, there may be things we can learn from their success, should we be open minded enough to study what they did right, and not just refuse to look at what they did because 'they aren't exactly like we are.' 

The closer you look, the more you realize that Finland’s approach works not because it is a universal template of success but, instead, because it was a Finnish solution to which they committed. Americans shouldn’t be looking to slavishly copy these exact hard choices; rather, we should be looking to the spirit with which they made them and their resolve to see these decisions through.

And please note nowhere in my previous post or in this post did I suggest we 'just throw money' at the educational system, because I agree, throwing money at things never makes them better. Ever.

www.edexcellence.net/commentary/education-gadfly-daily/flypaper/2012/real-lessons-from-finland-hard-choices-rigorously-implemented.html

[Deleted]

in this country, we cant even get every citizen to speak english, much less read and write it

we have to provide translators, and forms in 2-3 languages at government offices

having one language would be a start....dont you think?

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

I've chalked up all discussion, all policy, all ideas re: government run schools to so much re-arranging deck chairs on the Titanic. There's just no fixing that mess. Government run schools already under-perform private schools, and even home schoolers (who frequently out-perform private schools). I'm skeptical of testing. Skeptical that anything can be done to salvage the utter disaster that is government run schools.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Oh, and btw- the per-pupil spending of government run schools is much more than private schools. If PARENTS were given the money instead of giving it directly to the schools, and given the unfettered power to select a school of their choice, the problems would resolve themselves.

[The Captain]

Apr 10, 2013 16:03:19 GMT -5 @gdgyva said:

in this country, we cant even get every citizen legal or illegal resident to speak english, much less read and write it

we have to provide translators, and forms in 2-3 languages at government offices

having one language would be a start....dont you think?

Fixed.  (Sorry, it's a big sore point with me- btw I agree with you 100%).


www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Office%20of%20Citizenship/Citizenship%20Resource%20Center%20Site/Publications/PDFs/M-685.pdf

[Deleted]

Apr 10, 2013 12:57:39 GMT -5 thyme4change said:

it's hard to connect with young mind. 
Especially when young mind's ready to soak up all the information.

I might argue the opposite is true.  A very hungry mind can learn with a mediocre teacher.  Not learn exceptionally well, but will learn something.  Whereas a young mind who has other struggles and competing priorities needs a very passionate and hard working teacher to bring that child in.

 Yes, there is always few exception.   I am speaking as a general term.
What's good for the "Goose" that does not mean necessarily good for all of children 

[formerroomate99]

One thing I don't like about the educational system is that you have an education degree that is a joke--any moron can pass.  And then to shore up not doing their job in the first place, teachers are required to waste tons of time and money on these 'continuing education' classes that are either repeats of what they already know or are teaching stuff they should have learned when they first went to college.  Why not just make an education degree a serious program and then let the teachers have their downtime? 

[formerroomate99]

Apr 10, 2013 18:07:00 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Oh, and btw- the per-pupil spending of government run schools is much more than private schools. If PARENTS were given the money instead of giving it directly to the schools, and given the unfettered power to select a school of their choice, the problems would resolve themselves.

The problem with that model is that the vast majority of the money goes to special ed.  If you gave parents what the schools actually spent on regular classrooms, it wouldn't come anywhere near paying for private school. 

[happyhoix]

Apr 11, 2013 9:49:36 GMT -5 formerroomate99 said:

One thing I don't like about the educational system is that you have an education degree that is a joke--any moron can pass.  And then to shore up not doing their job in the first place, teachers are required to waste tons of time and money on these 'continuing education' classes that are either repeats of what they already know or are teaching stuff they should have learned when they first went to college.  Why not just make an education degree a serious program and then let the teachers have their downtime? 

Actually this is the first thing the Finns did when they started their education reform in the 60's.

They looked at their teacher training programs, standardized the requirements and made the classes harder to to ensure the teachers graduated with a solid knowledge of their area.

Only the top 10% of the class was accepted into the teacher training programs, and it became a status symbol to be a teacher, because it was so hard to get into the program.

Something we might want to think about here.

[The Captain]

Apr 11, 2013 9:52:04 GMT -5 formerroomate99 said:

Apr 10, 2013 18:07:00 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Oh, and btw- the per-pupil spending of government run schools is much more than private schools. If PARENTS were given the money instead of giving it directly to the schools, and given the unfettered power to select a school of their choice, the problems would resolve themselves.

The problem with that model is that the vast majority of the money goes to special ed.  If you gave parents what the schools actually spent on regular classrooms, it wouldn't come anywhere near paying for private school. 

Average per pupil spending on special ed is about twice what the non special ed per pupil spending is.

www.auditor.leg.state.mn.us/ped/pedrep/9703-sum.pdf

Considering about 14% of the total enrollment is special ed I would hardly say the "vast majority" in a school district's spending budget is going to special ed.  Disporportionate?  Yes, but harding the bulk of the spending.

What I find much more disturbing is that 1 out of every 7 students is now considered special ed.  Really?  I know there have been increases in some things like autism but that number seems unrealistically high to me.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Apr 11, 2013 9:49:36 GMT -5 formerroomate99 said:

One thing I don't like about the educational system is that you have an education degree that is a joke--any moron can pass.  And then to shore up not doing their job in the first place, teachers are required to waste tons of time and money on these 'continuing education' classes that are either repeats of what they already know or are teaching stuff they should have learned when they first went to college.  Why not just make an education degree a serious program and then let the teachers have their downtime? 

Come to Florida.  All you need is a college degree.

[djAdvocate]

Apr 10, 2013 16:03:19 GMT -5 @gdgyva said:

in this country, we cant even get every citizen to speak english, much less read and write it

we have to provide translators, and forms in 2-3 languages at government offices

having one language would be a start....dont you think?

why?  most countries have at LEAST two.  i think that should be a minimum requirement for HS graduation: fluency in TWO languages.  you choose.

[djAdvocate]

Apr 10, 2013 15:55:36 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

Comparing Finland to the US is about as appropriate as comparing a pea to a hand grenade.

Finland wasn't always where they are today. They had a push for educational reform in the 1960's, which focused on 3 things  - 1) develop of a national curriculum with students held to rigrous standards, 2) dramatic changes in teacher certifications and 3) controls from their federal government that evaluated the school level learning and teaching.

This 1960's reform is what pushed them from 'average' to 'great.'

Generally when you are trying to find a good model on how to do something, you look at other successful models to see what worked for other people, and evaluate whether or not that might work for you. So yes, while Finland isn't the US, there may be things we can learn from their success, should we be open minded enough to study what they did right, and not just refuse to look at what they did because 'they aren't exactly like we are.' 

The closer you look, the more you realize that Finland’s approach works not because it is a universal template of success but, instead, because it was a Finnish solution to which they committed. Americans shouldn’t be looking to slavishly copy these exact hard choices; rather, we should be looking to the spirit with which they made them and their resolve to see these decisions through.

And please note nowhere in my previous post or in this post did I suggest we 'just throw money' at the educational system, because I agree, throwing money at things never makes them better. Ever.

www.edexcellence.net/commentary/education-gadfly-daily/flypaper/2012/real-lessons-from-finland-hard-choices-rigorously-implemented.html

i am with happy on this.  Finland rocks.  we should clear the slate and start over again, using their principles for our public institutions.  we would eventually catch up. 

but we won't do that.  we will keep (proudly?) embracing our traditional model, and keep falling further behind.