Posted on 02/14/2004 7:18:36 AM PST by George Frm Br00klyn Park
WBAL AM-RADIO Baltimore
Ron Smith's "Something to Say" Commentary
School Budgets, Teaching and Teachers
Friday, February 13, 2004
“I could see the fury in their eyes,” said Baltimore Teacher’s Union President Marietta English upon her arrival at the polling place where city school teachers voted “no” to accepting a pay cut to reduce the budget deficit faced by the reeling school system.
It’s clear that teachers feel they shouldn’t have to suffer for the financial ineptitude of their bosses. One can sympathize with their emotions; especially since many of them regularly dip into their own pockets to pay for classroom supplies the school system doesn’t deliver.
But the problem remains, a $58 million cumulative deficit, and something has to be done about it. There doesn’t seem to be a way to avoid hundreds more layoffs and other belt-tightening. It is a crisis, simple as that.
---------------------
While on the subject of teaching and teachers, it is good to remember that public school teachers are the real front line in our continuing war against ignorance, illiteracy, social inequality and cultural despair. How are these front line troops being trained? What are they themselves being taught in their college classes?
These are questions that journalist Rita Kramer sought to answer more than a decade ago when she embarked on an extensive tour of the Ed School World, visiting 15 campuses across the country, talking to students, faculty and administrators, attending classes and then visiting the elementary and high schools where the trainees had their first teaching experiences.
What resulted was a most instructive book, "Ed School Follies : The Miseducation of America's Teachers." It’s a must read still for anyone who would like to understand what’s happened to the teaching profession in this country. There are still many skilled and inspiring teachers, make no doubt about that. But the system is stacked against them.
Furthermore, the inane No Child Left Behind Act that the Bush Administration has pushed down the throats of the states is the bastard child of the modern educational theories so devastatingly detailed in Ms. Kramer’s book. It, as you probably know by now, mandates that in a decade, all American school children meet the same educational standards in key subjects at certain ages. That this is an impossible goal doesn’t matter. It makes sure that massive fraud will ensue on the part of educators who will have to lie and cheat in order to satisfy Uncle Sam.
Educational reform is much needed, but the proliferation of mush-minded teaching theories makes it all but impossible. As Ms. Kramer put it so well:
“No amount of restructuring or empowerment, no amount of money spent on salaries or programs, will make much difference until we place knowledge itself at the center of educational enterprise.” Currently, she adds, “Knowledge – real knowledge in the form of facts, not ‘thinking skills’ or feelings of self-worth – is about the least concern of the professional education industry.”
Do they have trouble or are they just saying they have trouble? Have you ever heard of a class being dismissed because they had no one to teach the class?
What is the turnover ratio in the school system and how does that compare to local private industry?
How does the hourly compensation for teachers compare with the hourly compensation for other college graduates? Get real! Teachers are not underpaid, if anything they are over paid for what they do!
Do you think it's 100?
Why wouldn't it be?
I'm assuming we're working with average children. Severely handicapped children, or children with vision or hearing difficulties, would obviously have to be taught in a different environment attuned to their special needs.
But the average 12-13 year old is smart enought to figure out how to set up and play a Gamecube. I see no reason why that child would not be capable of going beyond eighth grade.
I haven't researched Baltimore, but most areas are having trouble; I can't see why Baltimore would be much different. It appears from the benefits you've listed that they are trying to find teachers for inner city schools. Do you want to go there? Do you want to be the "teacher next door" in some ghetto?
Usually the classes dismissed because they had no one to teach are electives. Required classes must be taught, but sometimes they are overcrowded or taught by unqualified people because qualified teachers can't be found. I've personally given up my planning period (and I know others who have as well) because a qualified teacher couldn't be found for certain classes and I didn't want the students spending the year with a substitute who didn't know the subject matter. (Yes, I got paid a little bit extra. No, the extra didn't cover the additional time it took. I really did do it for the kids.)
How does the hourly compensation for teachers compare with the hourly compensation for other college graduates? Get real!
Hourly compensation is a bit misleading. It doesn't take into account the additional time most good teachers put in at home, at night, and on weekends. Hourly compensation also doesn't necessarily pay the mortgage.
Teachers are not underpaid, if anything they are over paid for what they do!
I can't understand why all the FReepers who claim this aren't rushing to be "overpaid" as we teachers are. Are you overpaid for what you do? Wouldn't you like to be?
In 1941, in more or less a state of nature, 25% of American Army inductees had HS diplomas.
I take that to mean that 75% of American 18 year olds lack the native ability or inclination to complete 4 years of English, 3 years of History, Mathematics through Trig, 3 years of Science including Physics and Quantitative Analysis, and a Foreign Language.
Now, you can redefine high school competency to mean, "didn't get arrested, smiles at adults", in which case I agree the number could approach 100.
But if you think 100%, or even 50% of American 18 year olds can approach the level of mastery to get a 1941 HS diploma, I think you are dreaming.
The result of the "100% can succeed" mentality is a system based on lies, which have to get bigger and bigger every year to cover up the last generation of lies.
It's time to stop, and make high school optional for anyone with an IQ less than 95.
2. Teachers have been stripped of the power to enforce any meaningful degree of discipline.
Of these two sad-but-true facts, I'd be inclined to say number 2 is the most relevent.
I was in one of the first classes in our area to experiment with forced busing. The school I attended regularly delayed classes to accomodate fights in the halls. But after the fight, the participants were not seen in class again for a week, if they were allowed back in at all.
The atmosphere was, to say the least, interesting. But at that school, I had the best English teacher I have ever had in my entire life. I also managed to learn algebra, a fair amount of biology, and how to make an acceptable tuna casserole.
The classes were huge (35 - 40 students), the building was over 100 years old, but the textbooks and materials were all up to date. The library was well stocked, and students were allowed to borrow up to three books at a time.
Students were removed from class if they were disruptive. I have no idea what went on in the Principal's office, since I was too chicken to find out. Most of the other students felt that way as well. The select few who felt the need to push the envelope got the opportunity to do that three times before expulsion. Where they went after that, I don't know. But the kids who remained were better off without them.
If you're going to allow for some type of training beyond eighth grade, I would agree. Some people aren't crazy about abstract concepts (my dad was one of them), but can build a house from the ground up, wire it, plumb it, and live happily ever after in it.
I'm lousy at building things. Even simple Sauder Furniture bookcases give me the fits. But the Vo-Tech guys I went to school with -- the guys who thought algebra was a type of fancy lettuce -- are master mechanics, furniture craftsmen, electricians, computer hardware specialists, the list goes on.
Everyone needs to learn to read, write, and make change. Beyond that, everyone needs to be directed to training that best suits his or her temperment. Whether the student and his parents choose the 9 - 12 grade curriculum, or the school tests and places the student is another matter for debate. But I do not think high school is optional, not when courses can be designed to fit the student and train him to be a productive 18 year old.
Well, I would ALLOW anybody to try to do anything.
But I would not allow, and I certainly would not require, people to go to school who don't want to be there and who lack the aptitude to succeed.
I've had a number of students over the years who don't do well with books but could, for example, take a car engine apart & put it back together with their eyes closed. Those kids are miserable in school, but do well in vocational settings.
I really like the European model, in which students who show aptitude are allowed to go on to high school, and those who don't are given vocational training. I think that before students go to high school, they ought to be able to show they have the ability to succeed there. If they don't have the skills, there ought to be remediation available for those students who wish to take advantage of it.
Of course, many FReepers will say that is taking away the students' freedom of choice....
Amelia, I have known and know many of the "really good teachers". They are demoralized to the max. And, also are afraid to stand up to the evil people running things. Today, most teachers are in it for the governmentjob security, and the relatively good wages and benefits. For the most part, teacher's saleries are FAR above the salaries of parents whose children they teach. From start at 25 grand to 20 year tenure and 45 grand and above. Teachers are running education in the trenches. Parents have little if anything to do with it. It has always been so. WHY has it gotten worse. Peace and love, George.
Fla, That is a keeper. THANKYOU!! Peace and love, George.
Yes, it is a crisis, a spending crisis. However spreading the burden between the taxpayers and tax spenders could close the deficit.
A "contribution" (like the Social Security "contribution"), say 10% of the cost, from the parents of attendees would probably raise enough to solve this spending crisis. This "contribution" would make parents more cost conscious come election time. It also would pave the way for a real solution, the removal of government and politicians from the education of our children.
With government no longer involved in education, your property taxes would fall by about 75% and your state taxes by about 40% (for most states that could mean the complete abolition of one of the income or sales tax). It would mean an end to fights over prayer in the schools. It would mean that things like teachers salaries would be set in the economic and not the political marketplace. Finally, it would return schools to places of education and not indoctrination.
I see you're another one of those who thinks teachers are well paid, but aren't interested in working for that good pay.
WHY has it gotten worse.
Why are there more divorces?
Why are more people living together without marriage?
Why is homosexuality more acceptable?
Why are there more out-of-wedlock births?
Why is there more nudity, profanity, and otherwise crassness in the media?
The world has changed, George. It's not just the schools.
Amelia, TEACHERS! LOL!!! "Sex" education. Peace and love, George.
With government no longer involved in education, your property taxes would fall by about 75% and your state taxes by about 40% (for most states that could mean the complete abolition of one of the income or sales tax). It would mean an end to fights over prayer in the schools. It would mean that things like teachers salaries would be set in the economic and not the political marketplace. Finally, it would return schools to places of education and not indoctrination
What you're suggesting is removing government totally from the business of education, and in effect having all schools become private schools. That was the state of education in this country, in most areas, 150 years ago.
Unfortunately, unlike 150 years ago, people who can't read, write, and do math will not be able to support themselves as farm laborers in today's world.
Back a couple of hundred years ago, it was decided that it was better for the country to have informed and educated citizens. States and localities implemented "poor taxes" so that children whose parents couldn't afford tuition and books could still go to school.
If your proposal is implemented, what do you propose to do about the children whose parents can't afford to pay for their schooling?
We could save some money by getting government out of the police, fire and court business, too!!!
And why do we need public sewers??
How did I know that??
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.