[mike777]

note household income in Chicago is 47k. so starting teachers make more than most households in Chicago

Fair enough if posters think that is a scandal for these teachers that are underpaid.

[PassedOut]

mike777, on 2012-September-11, 13:23, said:

It is tough in today's economy to call a starting teachers job with just a 4 year degree and no exp at 50K in Chicago a scandal. Throw in having summers off and vacation/holidays. Please add in benefits which run around 15k or so at that level.

I understand Ken would never take the job for that amount of money or even more but trust me there are millions out there who will.

But not the people that we should have performing what are some of the most important jobs in our country.

[mike777]

PassedOut, on 2012-September-11, 14:13, said:

But not the people that we should have performing what are some of the most important jobs in our country.

GEEz CNN just reported that half of all current graduates are unemployed or have jobs that dont require a college degree.

Do you really think Chicago will get worse results. Why do you insult all these people and many others who dont have teaching degrees as unqualified.

This is just silly to call a starting job at 50K and benefits at 15K a scandal.

What number for you is not a scandal?

[jonottawa]

mike777, on 2012-September-11, 09:28, said:

Here is an option for at least one small step forward.

http://www.khanacademy.org/about

A free world-class education for anyone anywhere.
The Khan Academy is an organization on a mission. We're a not-for-profit with the goal of changing education for the better by providing a free world-class education for anyone anywhere.

All of the site's resources are available to anyone. It doesn't matter if you are a student, teacher, home-schooler, principal, adult returning to the classroom after 20 years, or a friendly alien just trying to get a leg up in earthly biology. The Khan Academy's materials and resources are available to you completely free of charge

I agree that this (or something like it) is where the solution to the education problem lies. Classes taught on video by the best teachers in America. Multiple choice tests after each lecture. For those students who achieve a high enough score on the test, they get to play some sort of educational game (giving the students an incentive to pay attention and do well) while the teacher spends time going over the test with the students who didn't do well enough.

[PassedOut]

mike777, on 2012-September-11, 14:19, said:

GEEz CNN just reported that half of all current graduates are unemployed or have jobs that dont require a college degree.

Just because you can get people to work cheaply now does not make it a good idea. Many of the talented folks you really want to keep will leave teaching once the job market heats up. I can say that some of my best hires have been ex-teachers who left (taking their valuable experience with them) because of inadequate salaries and poor working conditions.

And yes, it's not just the salaries. Teachers need much better facilities and resources and a support system that helps them to be the best teachers possible.

I went to three different elementary schools and three different high schools, and I saw first hand the tremendous variation in the quality of schools and teachers. My sons are all grown now, but making sure that they were educated properly was a tremendous challenge. Neither private nor public schools did an adequate job below college, so we home-schooled our sons for a few years until they were ready for college.

But not every family is in a position to do that, nor should they have to.

[mike777]

Just saw a sign on CNN, the teacher said they had no library.

How in the world can a school in Chicago have no library at all? Can a charity or teachers even start their own small library..one just wonders what in the world is going on there.

The two grammer schools I went to on the far south side had a library, they were wonderful.

I wish they would tell us where that school was so we posters could donate some books to at least give it a small start.

I mean I have all the Harry Potter books, do kids still want to read those?

[jonottawa]

mike777, on 2012-September-11, 15:37, said:

Just saw a sign on CNN, the teacher said they had no library.

Do they have an Internet?

[kenberg]

mike777, on 2012-September-11, 13:23, said:

I understand Ken would never take the job for that amount of money or even more but trust me there are millions out there who will.

I sort of regret saying this. I am 73, happily retired, and it's easy for me to say what I would and would not do. At other times in my life my response may well have been different.

Perhaps better to say that we know a woman who quit teaching in public schools to take a job in a private school at a pay cut. She is happier. My wife's older daughter quit teaching math and got a mathematics job in industry. Both of these women are quite capable, they got tired of the crap, they left.

The probelm, I think, is that we are paying fairly high salaries and we are not happy with the result. Current salaries are too generous by far for bad performance, but, from what I have seen, many of the best still pick up and leave.

It's very frustrating, and as BillW said, I don't know what to do about it. I don't think that grading teachers on student performance without taking into account the environment helps any, to put it mildly.

[y66]

awm, on 2012-September-11, 09:39, said:

Some lesser-known facts:

US schools are best in the world if you control for poverty.

That's an interesting assertion.

My son went to public schools for grades K-8 in a small town in northern Virginia that withdrew from the surrounding county in 1948 in order to control its school system. The high school is ranked in the US top 20 by US News & World Report and I would say he got a very good education. I have always suspected that the town's southern boundary was drawn where it was to exclude one of the poorest neighborhoods.

[y66]

I enjoyed the coincidence involving Rahm Emmanuel on this thread and the Romney Obama thread. Rahm announced at the Democratic convention that he was taking charge of super PAC financing for Obama but it looks like he has put that off to deal with the strike. Unlike my distinguished forum mate from Orange County, I am a huge fan of the guy and I am counting on him to get this strike settled quickly and make sure Obama continues to outperform Romney on the campaign financing front for the next 2 months.

[TimG]

dwar0123, on 2012-September-11, 13:18, said:

The reason you can't understand this sentiment is because it doesn't exist, no sane person wants to hold children back.

Lower level learners benefit from having higher level learners in their class. Sort of the same way that it benefits bridge players to play against better opponents.

Higher level learners do not benefit from having lower level learners in their class.

Lots of people, indeed lots of school districts, I dare say the overwhelming majority of school districts, do not divide their second graders up by learning level. Instead they mix kids of different learning levels in the same classroom intentionally.

This mixing holds back certain children.

Maybe administrators don't want to hold any children back, but they make a conscious decision to follow a policy which holds some children back.

Of course, if they instead did separate children by ability, they would be holding back the lower level learners who would no longer get the opportunity to benefit from having higher level learners in their classes. It's something of a no-win situation.

[kenberg]

Strong and weak students:

Life is complicated. When I was in ninth grade, I helped another student in algebra. He was a serious student,, but it was a tough class for him. In eleventh grade I took metal shop, and guess who was one of the best students, and happy to return the favor of assistance as I struggled with some unfamiliar tools. Adolescence is a crazy time of life with surprises coming from every direction. I can't really say that I wish I had studied harder, but I owe some of my teachers an apology. Non-aligned agendas.

Yeah, I know. This won't help settle the strike.

[Bbradley62]

kenberg, on 2012-September-11, 20:15, said:

Non-aligned agendas.

Yeah, I know. This won't help settle the strike.

Actually, finding a way to align the agendas would go a long way to settling the issues of the strike.

[VMars]

I taught a summer school class aimed at Geometry repeaters that used Khan Academy. The good part was that it enabled me to assign problems to students so I could intervene with students that needed the help. The bad part is that I really don't think that most kids (especially those that didn't do any talking, either to me or to other kids) really learned anything. I have those students in my actual Geometry class this year, and most of them tell me that they "enjoyed" the summer school program, and ask when they can do that again, but I don't see actual gains in skills/knowledge as shown in their classwork.

If you really think that all students need to do to learn math is watching a video with someone talking to them, and then doing problems that encourage them to click quickly and not actually think (because they get badges for that), then you haven't taught in public school in the current century. I would catch students working on "telling time" or "adding numbers" because they wanted to up their badges. The saddest thing is that students wouldn't click on the "hints" or "I want help" button, because that would set back their progress and they'd have to do more problems.

I believe that others in the forum have made posts about the latest research in education, which says that students learn best in social settings (discussing concepts with others, etc.) and learn best with a combination of "explore/discovery" time, instead of having someone just tell them what to do. Guess how Khan is set up?

Basically, Khan is old-school style learning, set in new technology. There are many good uses of it, and I definitely use it to supplement my teaching (just today I referred a Pre-Calc student to it for practice with fractions that are interfering with her ability to succeed in PC), but there is no way that I believe that it's actually a step forward to the future of education.

mike777, on 2012-September-11, 09:28, said:

Here is an option for at least one small step forward.

http://www.khanacademy.org/about

A free world-class education for anyone anywhere.
The Khan Academy is an organization on a mission. We're a not-for-profit with the goal of changing education for the better by providing a free world-class education for anyone anywhere.

All of the site's resources are available to anyone. It doesn't matter if you are a student, teacher, home-schooler, principal, adult returning to the classroom after 20 years, or a friendly alien just trying to get a leg up in earthly biology. The Khan Academy's materials and resources are available to you completely free of charge

[phil_20686]

This seems relevant: http://marginalrevol...st-germany.html

Anyway, its not that clear what schools can be expected to achieve, given the number of students from disturbed backgrounds that they seem to have, particularly in inner city areas.

I do think that more money would help. Especially in terms of resources. For one thing, I think people under appreciate the effect that the buildings themselves have on students. If you are being educated in some grand and expensive building, there is a subconscious pressure to associate education with success, and also that society takes education seriously. Schools should also have on site sports fields, enough that they can do after school sport every day for every student. Competitive sport is something that helps many children form an attitude of discipline. It doesn't matter whether you learn the benefits of hard work on the training field, or in the classroom, as long as you learn them.

Our school had a wall outside the assembly hall where they inscribed the names of all the former pupils who had died serving the armed forces, particularly the two world wars, and if you were sent to see the headmaster, you would sit and wait in front of these names until the secretary called you in. It made an impression on me, it was hard not to take your education seriously when you stood in front of the names of four hundred odd former pupils who died to defend a way of life we take for granted. I think these things foster a sense of identity and purpose which is often lacking in sixties built prefabricated school buildings.

I really believe that investments in human capital are important in this day and age. I would like to see government spend a lot more on education generally. I think that private school fees give a rough guide for how much needs to be spent to maintain good schools (assuming they have good buildings to start with), is about £10,000 per high school student, and about £7000 per primary school student.

The BBC says

Quote

Figures are given for per pupil spending for primary and secondary schools in 2009-10. They show huge variations - between £1,500 and £33,000 for secondary schools (£1,000 and £17,000 for primaries). These are the extremes, but there are still wide variations between funding - secondaries tend to fall between £4,000 and £9,000, primaries between £3,000 and £8,000. However, the data is not given for academies, which are outside local authority control and have larger budgets, so the figures do not give the whole picture.

I think that UK schools do not need so much extra funding in order to reach the levels that I think are necessary, but they do need a large amount of capital spending. Almost all state schools lack sufficient playing fields. This would almost certainly cost an unimaginable amount of money, to buy up and bulldoze enough houses in London to build playing fields for inner city schools, but worth it imo. Something that is worth adding to the National Debt, put these low interest rates to good use

[billw55]

TimG, on 2012-September-11, 19:14, said:

Of course, if they instead did separate children by ability, they would be holding back the lower level learners who would no longer get the opportunity to benefit from having higher level learners in their classes. It's something of a no-win situation.

No way it will ever happen in the US. Any administrator that did this would be promptly fired for racial segregation.

No, I'm not saying that black kids are dumber. But we all know the reality in urban America: poor school performance is correlated strongly with poverty which is correlated strongly with race.

phil_20686, on 2012-September-12, 02:23, said:

Anyway, its not that clear what schools can be expected to achieve, given the number of students from disturbed backgrounds that they seem to have, particularly in inner city areas.

Perhaps the argument can be made that some portion of students, particularly at high school level, are beyond help no matter what resources are expended. I am not aware of any public official advancing this theory though, it would sound too much like race baiting.

[hrothgar]

billw55, on 2012-September-12, 06:44, said:

No way it will ever happen in the US. Any administrator that did this would be promptly fired for racial segregation.

New York State used to have an extensive "tracking" system which separated children by ability.
As I understand matters its largely been abandoned, however, the primary reason was budgetary pressure rather than race baiting.

New York City maintains a variety of magnet schools such as Bronx Science. Admission to these schools is based on a competitive entrance exam. Once again, this is a standard part of education system and no one is getting fired for "race baiting".

Looks like you have some real issues with race...
(You've brought it up twice in a single thread)

In general, any time you have to caveat your posts by saying "I'm not saying that black kids are dumber" you ARE saying just that...

[phil_20686]

billw55, on 2012-September-12, 06:44, said:

Perhaps the argument can be made that some portion of students, particularly at high school level, are beyond help no matter what resources are expended. I am not aware of any public official advancing this theory though, it would sound too much like race baiting.

So in the UK these correlations with race are not nearly so strong. "Disturbed background" in this context in the uk is euphemistic for the children of divorced parents. Before dwar accuses me of right wing fear mongering again, I am just going to cite it, 1, 2, 3, 4.

Here is a typical quotation

Quote

Nor is there anyquestion that the children of single mothers fare worse on a wide range ofoutcomes.[1] Wendy Sigle-Rushton and Sara McLanahan (2004)offer the most up to date review, which indicates that those who grow up infatherless families do worse on measures of scholastic achievement, educationalattainment, psychological health, behavioural problems, delinquency, stablefamily formation, early sexual debut, partner satisfaction, economic success,and even physical health. Thedisparities often persist into adulthood and remain even when commonly measuredcovariates are statistically controlled.
<br clear="all">
[1] Because the majority of single parents are single mothers (about fourin five in 2003), I generally refer to “single mothers” throughout this paperrather than “single parents”. I alsoimplicitly conceptualize “two-parent families” in terms of heterosexual unions. These choices are simply for expositionalsimplification, but a more complete review of the field would examinedifferences between children of single mothers and single fathers as well asthe evidence on how having same-sex parents affects children. Other distinctions, such as betweencohabiting and married heterosexual couples are discussed below where relevant.

[phil_20686]

billw55, on 2012-September-12, 06:44, said:

Perhaps the argument can be made that some portion of students, particularly at high school level, are beyond help no matter what resources are expended. I am not aware of any public official advancing this theory though, it would sound too much like race baiting.

Just to be clear, I meant my statement literally, in the sense that "It is not clear what level of pupil attainment represents a successful school in these circumstance", not in the colloquial sense of "achievement being impossible/pointless to attempt"

[jonottawa]

I'd never heard of Khan, but it's pretty cool. Brushed up a little on my calculus last night and even learned a couple of new tricks. (Are there only quizzes for math or am I doing it wrong?)

One criticism I have would be that the narrator of the videos I saw was 'graduate assistant at state school' level and not 'oh my god best professor ever' level.

As to fast clicking and not learning, I'd think that could be easily fixed if it was set up to penalize errors more harshly.

I just wish something like that had been around 30 years ago.