Obama booed by some NEA teachers

[Torie]

His plan also incentives the practice of fudging students' test results. Making pay contingent on higher test scores  reeks of the failed NCLB law.

Yes, we must continue paying teachers the same; we must insure that the vast bulk of them continue to be the C students from third tier colleges. It is America's future that is at stake.

[Torie]

We need to weed out mediocrity by rewarding good teaches with generous pay (the best should make like 150K per year or more), and firing the weak sisters. We must get rid of tenure and destroy the teachers' unions. We must attract a better quality person to be a teacher, by making it a profession again, where the talented are rewarded, and the untalented are driven out. It is just so damn simple really. Paying everyone the same, more or less, with tweaks for longevity and taking worthless courses, is just so demoralizing for those who are the best and the brightest. They frankly don't  want to be associated with the drones (it reflects poorly on them frankly), much less be paid like them.

The beast needs competition, and it needs it now. We need vouchers everywhere. We need to threaten the school warehouses with empty desks, as parents vote with their feet. We need to suffuse fear into the public school educational establishment - fear that they will lose their jobs, and end up on the sidewalk hoisting  a sign reading, "Will work for food."

[Torie]

We must get rid of tenure and destroy the teachers' unions.

That is the solution, the rest is really useful.  Although I highly disagree that we should pay $150k+ to people who "work" 180 days a year in most cases.

Well if it's Arkansas, cut it down to 100K per year for the uber mensch teaches. .  In Manhattan or LA or SF, 150K per year, is barely enough to live a middle class life style.

[Torie]

We must get rid of tenure and destroy the teachers' unions.

That is the solution, the rest is really useful.  Although I highly disagree that we should pay $150k+ to people who "work" 180 days a year in most cases.

Yes! Destroying all those damn evil unions will solve all our problems!

If I didn't know any better, I would perhaps think that you were a Dem from Michigan (and probably not a Yankee WASP type to boot).

[Torie]

We must get rid of tenure and destroy the teachers' unions.

That is the solution, the rest is really useful.  Although I highly disagree that we should pay $150k+ to people who "work" 180 days a year in most cases.

Well if it's Arkansas, cut it down to 100K per year for the uber mensch teaches. .  In Manhattan or LA or SF, 150K per year, is barely enough to live a middle class life style.

That still seems kind of high, what are current rates?  I know the highest paid non-supervisor/other administrator in the district (minus coaching money) makes around $95,000.  And we're a blue ribbon district 7 miles from NYC

You don't get it. You are not going to attract the best and the brightest, unless [there] is a solid upper middle class life style at the end of the rainbow. Paying what I suggest is essential, just as firing the underperformers (perhaps a near majority of what is now the despoiled public commons), is equally as essential.

[Torie]

You don't get it. You are not going to attract the best and the brightest, unless their is a solid upper middle class life style at the end of the rainbow. Paying what I suggest is essential, just as firing the underperformers (perhaps a near majority of what is now the despoiled public commons), is equally as essential.

I understand your point, but are suggesting $150k as a max salary or a starting salary?  I could understand a teacher that has performed well and by a teacher for a decade or so making $150k, but not starting out, where would the ceiling be?  $300k+?  I think that would cripple the taxpayers considering the mess my town is already in  (although a lot of that comes from overpayed police)

Correct, it is a max.

[Torie]

You are not going to attract the best and the brightest,

I don't see how trying to attract people with the highest academic qualifications will help the (or any) education system much. What matters far more is having people who can actually teach; and levels of formal academic achievement are often very poor measures of that sort of thing.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

People motivated mostly by money aren't going to be interested in becoming teachers, full stop. This is a good thing. Such people would make for awful teachers.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm not sure how firing a majority of the teaching profession would help the education system much. Sounds rather Soviet actually.

I don't agree with a thing you said. Teaching is a low prestige job in the US on the secondary level, and I have elucidated the reasons why. Folks of talent and dedication want to be recognized for their talent, and don't want to be associated with drones. In the "good old days," when we discriminated against women, and forced them into teaching and nursing, we did have some excellent teachers (and nurses). Those days are gone. Now we have much lower quality personnel in both professions. My best teachers by far in secondary schools were women. (Some of the men, particularly on the high school level, could barely chew their own food, and that was back in the "good old days." Now, it must be a total horror show.) 

As to those women of high IQ and erudition, the women who helped shape Torie in his youth, these  days they would be MD's, lawyers, business executives, media executives, etc. The system these days is oversubscribed with drones. They need to by systematically purged as the order kicks in - Soviet style, yes, And what is the whip to make it happen? Competition! What a concept! Who knew?

The system needs to be cleansed, root and branch. And what is happening in our poorer neighborhoods as to schooling, is a moral outrage. It makes me ashamed. It undermines the very moral foundations of the rationale of a just capitalistic system, posited on equal opportunity. The status quo must be destroyed. It nausiates me frankly.

[Torie]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Why oh why? There is only one individual in a classroom, not a "department."  Collectivist thinking here is toxic.

[Torie]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Why oh why? There is only one individual in a classroom, not a "department."  Collectivist thinking here is toxic.

The way it was explained to me (and this was two years ago), is that individual merit pay promotes competition (in the bad way, meaning the possibility of teachers helping students cheat on standardized tests) and puts too much reliance on one individual teacher, when teaching should in fact be a joint effort and responsibility.  It made sense to me when I heard it.

You do know this test thing is a cloak behind which to hide the rot don't you?  If the test is given by independent sources, and tests competence, and teachers teach to a test, which is about competence, what is wrong with that? The argument is pathetic, as some grand unified theory that we can't evaluate teachers, and dump the incompetents, and reward the competent, and do it on an individual basis. We do it in most spheres of our economy. It is sad we can't do it, where it is needed most. It is a disgrace. It's evil, yes evil.

I don't necessarily think "merit" should be solely a function of test scores anyway. But it is a metric, and an important one. And yes, one must take into account the SES of the classroom, and the delta function, and on and on. It in the end is somewhat subjective. The subjective does not frighten me. You know, the word gets around, as to who the good teachers are, and who the drones are. It is not rocket science.

The main thing however, is to create a system, where we attract far better talent than we attract now, particularly in the "wrong" zip codes. That is job one. And on the domestic side, I can think of little that is more important, and pressing.

[Torie]

Blaming the parents is a cop out. It solves nothing in any event. We can't remake parents. But we can remake the classroom, by putting top flight folks in it, alphas rather than betas. To do that, we need to do what I suggest. There is no other way.

Sure, if you have a high IQ, and attentive parents, you hardly need teachers at all. In some high school courses, I just read the text book, and skipped class, the teach was that entropic. My grade was often "ASS," and in one case "APP." And my Dad agreed with me, and gave me get out of jail free slips. My Dad was great. I still miss him, after all these years.

[Torie]

Here is some data for you Alun, about the decline of the quality of teachers over time. This should not be about ideology Alun. This should be about taking effective action to improve education quality, particularly in the inner cities, where kids don't have the outside parental resources to fall back on, or elite schools, or private schools. I don't consider such an agenda right wing.

[Torie]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Untrue. It once was true. It is no longer. Check out my link.

[Torie]

I'm glad to know I was missed so much for these 3 days that I've polluted Al's name, but he's Alun, not Alcun

Correction effected. Thanks.

[Torie]

Alun, what do you propose to improve the educational outcomes of lower SES students in the near to intermediate term? (Note the emphasis on the word "outcomes.") If you don't like my ideas, what are yours? And if you grab the tarbaby of class size, I will eat you alive, so be forewarned. 

[Torie]

Alun, what do you propose to improve the educational outcomes of lower SES students in the near to intermediate term? (Note the emphasis on the word "outcomes.")

More vocational education, more arts and activites stuff, better facilities, less testing, new or cleaned-up buildings, etc, etc. That kind of thing.

Oh, and make it easier for teachers and other staff to deal with troublemakers without fear of litigation or whatever (just to make that clear; that's not code for "allow teachers to hit children" or anything like that...)

The most serious issues can't be dealt with on a near-to-intermediate-term basis though.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Oh, no danger of going down that route

Putting aside vocational training for those not headed into a white collar profession, I don't see what facilities and nice buildings has to do with educational at all. I had classes in WWII army barracks. And I don't see how one can measure progress and performance without tests.  Discipline is always good. I think school uniforms are a good idea actually. Flashy clothing can be distracting. "Arts and activities" (activities = field trips?) are nice, but peripheral.

You agenda is a bit "woolly" Alun.

[Torie]

The SAT tests reading comprehension and verbal skills, and that is what it is all about. If you don't have that, you have nothing.

[Torie]

The SAT tests reading comprehension and verbal skills, and that is what it is all about. If you don't have that, you have nothing.

The new SAT is a bit better because they teach writing skills, but honestly it is easy as hell to ace the verbal part. I got a 710 and I suck at verbal communication. I just learned how to game the system, only possible because my parents had the extra 500 bucks to spend. The math part is not so bad and you do need actual knowledge there. See I took the test 3 times, each time I did a little bit better. I got a 700 on math each time I took it but was able to improve my verbal score each time. I accomplished that by learning how to take multiple choice tests, a luxury many cannot afford.

Ya, working at test taking helps a bit. I self tested myself a zillion years ago, and did some other work, and was able to push my verbal SAT score to about 780 from 730 or so. But it still is a good test in general, even if, if those who apply themselves can push the envelop a bit. To deny that is just so sciolistic, bordering on the eristic. Heck, I learned the word lagniappe from the exercise.

[Torie]

persiflage, eristic, sciolistic, so many ways to put down the opposition. I love it.  I picked up eristic from Bill Buckley, but forgot the word after he used it, and called his office, and his secretary after I described the word, knew it right away.

[Torie]

There seems to be this assumption that assuming arguendo, that teachers are teaching to a test, that means the kids are not acquiring real skills, and the skills that they really need, ie, verbal skills, and some degree of numeracy. It has this PC patina to it, but I think it's probably little more than that. The dirty little secret is that so many teachers are drones, that they freak at the notion that someone might find out how truly mediocre they are, based on some metric, that has some objectivity to it.