Posted on 01/09/2007 8:12:11 AM PST by shrinkermd
...This is the most widely held myth about education in America--and the one most directly at odds with the available evidence. Few people are aware that our education spending per pupil has been growing steadily for 50 years. At the end of World War II, public schools in the United States spent a total of $1,214 per student in inflation-adjusted 2002 dollars. By the middle of the 1950s that figure had roughly doubled to $2,345. By 1972 it had almost doubled again, reaching $4,479. And since then, it has doubled a third time, climbing to $8,745 in 2002.
Since the early 1970s, when the federal government launched a standardized exam called the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), it has been possible to measure student outcomes in a reliable, objective way. Over that period, inflation-adjusted spending per pupil doubled. So if more money produces better results in schools, we would expect to see significant improvements in test scores during this period. That didn't happen...
...One reason for the prominence of the underpaid-teacher belief is that people often fail to account for the relatively low number of hours that teachers work. It seems obvious, but it is easily forgotten: teachers work only about nine months per year. During the summer they can either work at other jobs or use the time off...
The most recent data available indicate that teachers average 7.3 working hours per day, and that they work 180 days per year, adding up to 1,314 hours per year. Americans in normal 9-to-5 professions who take two weeks of vacation and another ten paid holidays per year put in 1,928 working hours. Doing the math, this means the average teacher gets paid a base salary equivalent to a fulltime salary of $65,440.
(Excerpt) Read more at frontpagemag.com ...
When I had my kid tested at 5th grade, she was reading at a grade 16 level but her math was at a grade 4 level.
Why was her math so low ? She couldn't do a lot of the problems w/o a calculator, and had never been exposed to basic equations like the concept of an unknown "x".
I agree that a 7yo has a great deal of trouble with abstractions, yet the very basics of algebra (x + 1 = ?) and sets can be handled successfully if presented correctly for the age group.
Go look at the Singapore math books or Ray's arithmetic if you want to see what average kids are doing overseas or did in the last century.
Which is also a valid point. Some people are gifted, and other not. I can't play pro football, and no amount of coaching would make me a great player. But that isn't PC when it comes to education.
Another skill seldom taught anymore - memorization.
Yes, rote memory is discredited. Actually, Jensen in his early works on "g" found that rote memory made children more competitive in the class room. Sort of a "if you fake it you will make it" dynamic.
Learning who to read and write is probably attainable to all those with an IQ of 70 and above. This means that 90% of children (not handicapped and developmentally disabled) who go to school.
I note that in some schools in Minnesota children are taught block printing and not cursive writing at all. Ditto for mathematics--they are taught to use calculators. In actual fact, in a fair system, they should be able to sue for educational non feasance. They are seriously handicapped vis a vis a child that can cursively write and calculate without a calculator.
Maybe I misunderstand. When I went to school everyone learned to read and do basic arithmetic. We learned essential geography and a lot of history. We learned how the American system of government works and studied the Constitution.
Now much of that appears to be lost. Why? It has nothing to do with student abilities, unless kids are actually losing IQ points! I think it has far more to do with unions and the fact that schools are stuck with trying to unscramble the great societal collapse that began in 1963.
See 44.
They stick it out even though they won't graduate.
Why do teachers assume they are they only ones who have to take classes to keep current or earn their masters degree on their own time.
Your right about engineers making more. My wife works 40-50 hours a week. To get a masters, my wife would have to take classes at night or on the weekend.
A large number of military officers have Masters degree. A small number are allowed to get a degree at the military's time. Most have to do it on their own time by attending classes at night or weekends. This doesn't include all the classes and training we have to do to get promoted. Some is done on military's time if your selected for the school and some you have to do at night and weekends.
Also, a engineering masters degree is more difficutl to get than a masters in education. Supply and demand.
Yes, the key is to present the lessons correctly and appropriately for that age/grade level.
Liberals hate the idea of "memorization". They think the child will not truly understand why they receive the answer they are "regurgitating" When in actuality, I always believed, for myself personally, that it was more important to initially contain the information permanently. Analyzing the "why's" and "how's" of it all were much easier after that.
http://www.cepr.net/publications/Congressional_Districts/education_by_state-NAEPstates.pdf
education_by_state-NAEPstates.pdf (application/pdf Object)
The 2005 NAEP statistics, a flawed test but all we have for comparison purposes in this country, tell us that 30% of kids, on average, are proficient at math or reading. By definition then, 70% are at a basic level or below.
If you look at the statistics even further, only 3-6% are "advanced".
Personally, I question what their definition of "proficient" and "advanced" really mean. I know they say it is a performance at grade level or above, but since grade level work has been so dumbed down, I question what they think is "grade level".
Compare a kid who can do mental math and a kid who cannot, both in algebra test. Who understands the concepts better when they are presented - the kid who struggles with arithmetic, or the kid who has it memorized ?
As you say, it's a lot easier for the kid who's memorized their math facts.
The same is true for grammar. Who writes a better paper in a shorter amount of time - the kid who's memorized grammar rules or the kid who wings it? (And no, a computer grammar checker will not solve all your problems!)
Great post. When I moved from Long Island in 2003, the AVERAGE teacher salary in my district was over $85K. Add in the pensions, the post-retiree health care benefits, the sabbaticals, and every summer off, and its not a bad gig at all. Starting salary is pretty low (mid 30s), but if you get to tenure you are set for life. Some of the more experienced teachers (with PhDs) earned over $100k annually.
I knew a husband and wife teacher who live on LI. They bought a ski condo in Vermont so they could spend their considerable free time there. They knew they had a racket.
This kind of argument is silly. Kind of hard to spend hypothetical dollars. Furthermore, it is an appeal to class envy. A better rebuttal to the false notion that teachers are "poor", is the fact that most teachers belong to two income families. My guess is that the average teacher family earns about $65.440 in spendable money. The high-end earners in that category more than double that amount. Teacher salaries are designed to attract those who are looking for a second income. But of course they are quite sufficient for a single person. The only thing is, that the better and brighter single people can usually find a full-time job that pays better, and one does get what one pays for.
yet another victory for unionists, feminists and racist liberals...< /sarcasm/off >
Actually liberals are values-free (ie amoral) people. They dont want to be defined by trivial things like FACTS, TRUTH and MORAL ABSOLUTES [oh and G_D too]. They want the freedom to slink around and to bend and shape reality according to their whims and political objectives
My remark was sarcastic. How can all children be above average? Given that at least one child is above average, at least one must be below average. Think Lake Wobegon.
BTW, the proper level of funding for public schools is zero.
I'll say! I recall my sixth grade class with Mr. Bush, a genuine educator. I was always a phenom at spelling and one day I spelled down everyone in class in a spelling bee. As I stood in front of the class by myself he kept giving me harder and harder words for another several minutes until I finally missed one.
Then he really lit into me for my failing work in math! "Anyone who can spell like that, and still fail at math, doesn't deserve any credit," I remember him saying -- along with a lot of other stuff I didn't want to hear. It shamed me into making a tremendous effort at math, which I hated and am still not great at. But I passed because he motivated me to make the effort.
I'm sure that fine man and wonderful, dedicated teacher, would be in serious trouble with everyone from the School Board to the ACLU if he did the same today (well, not in my case -- my parents would support him all the way!) But today even the good teachers aren't allowed to use methods that are effective in generating good student performance.
Thank you Mr. Bush! You and several other truly wonderful teachers made a huge difference in my life! Though you all are gone, you are remembered.
It starts in early grade school. The "little dears" are not allowed to feel bad about anything, and giving no motivation. I had teachers like your Mr. Bush, one who told my father that she "hated me" because I made her look stupid.
I sometimes wonder if that was her way of motivating me. Because of that comment, I tried harder.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.