Earlier quoted context omitted.
The idea is that if you pay more, you may be able to attract more people who are skilled enough to make more than $52K in the private sector, and thereby hopefully duck around the "those who can, do, those who can't, teach", as, alas, there's more than a kernel of truth to that.
This is very true. I just don't like the idea of "Pay up because we idealists think it's urgent. It should be important like surgeons." It's very hard to get to a social change to pay them like Singapore. I think the means to this ends is via charter schools. Parents know who the good teachers are, and they fight to get taught by them. Charter schools have found a way in some cases to pay up. I think parental voting…
Reinventing the School
41–50 of 51 posts
Re: Reinventing the School
#42The school isn't the problem. There are huge social problems that need to be addressed, which are unfortunately politically-incorrect, before we start changing schools. Go visit a school in a very poor area sometime. They need social workers, not teachers. The problem is that a lot of teachers don't want to be social workers, they want to be teachers.
Re: Reinventing the School
#43Every time someone mentions teachers pay relationship to education/grade quality I think they simply haven't taken a step back to compare against alternatives and looked at the numbers (adjusted). Sure a bad system will have marginally better performance when you throw money at it, but that is practically a given and doesn't provide proper systemic evaluation.
On average private school teachers make significantly less... http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=55
And on average private school highschoolers have better or equal grades... (adjusted for student characteristics) http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pubs/studies/2006461.as...
Public school per student cost: http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=66
(The above cost is excepted as an undercount by every source I can find though there is dispute by how much, see: "They Spend WHAT? The Real Cost of Public Schools" and a rebuttal here: http://nepc.colorado.edu/thinktank/review-they-spend-what that agrees with the undercounting but disagrees with CATO institutes exact figures).
Cost per student and a rebuttal/additional findings: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405270230382220457746... http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2009-08-31/news/36831030_...
Taking into account "cost per student" grades are the same or better with equivalent spending and are simply more cost efficient teaching systems. All this is without further drilling down into private school methodology to identify the highest efficiency implementations (the NAEP study suggests that the lutherans might be a one of several starting points for that investigation).
When you are putting people into a flawed system with perverse incentives, throwing money at the people involved is a poor attempt at a solution and is "mostly" a red herring.
If the claim is that these grade differences aren't really an education but a cultural and societal issue (ask yourself why "schools of choice" perform better?) than it needs to be addressed as such using a change in methodology and improvements in social services systems/spending.
Re: Reinventing the School
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree. I think stuff like Khan academy https://www.khanacademy.org/ is the future.
Although I use video instruction occasionally in my own lessons, it is not a solution. It is a one-shoe fits all approach. The talent of a teacher is to be able to engage learners of all ability ranges and adapt their lessons according to the progress made by individual students. Software can't do this (yet).
Re: Reinventing the School
#45Re: Reinventing the School
#46Instead of reinventing the school, I think we need to be thinking outside the school. The institution of school comes with a whole host of problems that are just systemic to the idea of everybody reporting to a central location and being primarily segregated by age. Not that you can't get a decent education in school, because many of us did. We don't need the best and brightest teachers. We need the most passionate a…
A quick question - when you say "where every kid could branch off to follow their interests" does this imply that kids in the US education system don't choose a set of subjects to focus on at about 14?
Re: Reinventing the School
#47This type of post aggravates me. It's part of the reason why nothing ever gets fixed. Everyone thinks they're an expert when it comes to education. Yet no one understands the problems.
1. Education is not about employment.
If you teach a kid to be a great widget maker, his/her entire life hinges on the demand for widgets. If widgets become irrelevant, the skill set s/he has developed over 12+ years are useless. [a]
Can anyone, with any certainty, claim their skill set will create a livable income for them for the next 20 years? Probably not. So why would any k-12 school create a curriculum around todays job market?
2. The Education system is not broken (mostly).
Everyone likes to point to the fact that the US educational system is failing in comparison to the rest of the world.
Except...it isn't.
"While reading proficiency in Mississippi is comparable to Russia or Bulgaria, Massachusetts performs more like Singapore, Japan, or South Korea. Often better: Massachusetts students rank fifth in the world in reading, lapping Singapore and Japan, and needless to say, every state in the union." [1][2]
Our problem isn't that the system is broken. The problem is the most of the country isn't implementing the system correctly.[3] There are a lot of reasons for that, many of which have nothing to do with the educational system directly.
Now that's not to say there aren't problems with the current system:
a. Standardized tests only show how good kids are at taking a test. A skill that is wholly unneeded throughout the rest of society.
b. The US system is structured like a factory. The structure made sense when we lived in a time when we needed factory workers. Now we need people who can analyze, think and execute. We do not have a public school system that caters to that.
c. There is too much emphasis on employment and not enough on creating life long learning.
3. Education can't be solved with an algorithm.
Here's a personal anecdote.
I taught geometry in an urban [code for black, hispanic and immigrant] school system. Each year I taught, I had at least 2 kids who would leave school and go to McDonalds to work a 4-11 pm shift 3-4 nights a week. They did this so they could help feed themselves and their family [4].
They never did their homework. They never studies. They slept in the class frequently and most of them failed.
Do you think you can write some code to fix that problem?
4. Educate yourself before you fix the problem.
People who write posts like the OP have not spent any time talking to teachers or admins, let alone spending time in a classroom. Solving the education problem is incredibly complicated and, actually, doesn't have much to do with the schools.
[a]: Fun fact: My aunt graduated from college with a degree in Soviet Economics in 1987. She thought it guaranteed her a job in government for a long time. Hahaha!!!!!
[1]: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/201...
[2]: http://www.hks.harvard.edu/pepg/PDF/Papers/PEPG11-03_Globall...
[3]: http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2013/01/10/16sos.h32.html?...
[4]: This is just one problem in particular. I also had a number of kids with drug problems, problems at home, safety issues walking/taking the bus to school and a slew of other non-school related issues. This problem stand out because nobody is actively doing the wrong thing.
Re: Reinventing the School
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
A quick question - when you say "where every kid could branch off to follow their interests" does this imply that kids in the US education system don't choose a set of subjects to focus on at about 14?
I attended a California high school in the 00's and most of the courses I took were prescribed; each year we got to take one "elective" course. Some students use these elective courses to take additional levels of courses that they are required. (For example, students are required to take one year of chemistry; some students such as myself opted to take a second year of chemistry. However, these students were a very…
In 5th year (~16 years old) you usually do 5 subjects - not sure if any of these are compulsory (English used to be, but I don't think it is now) - these are examined in your "Highers" (Higher Grades). I did Maths, Chemistry, Physics, English and Engineering Drawing (this was before CS was available, it is now).
Highers are used for University entrance and, in Scotland, depending on your birthday you can get your Highers and be off to University when you are 17. Sixth year at secondary school in Scotland is either used top up your exams if you didn't get enough to do the course you want, doing more advanced courses and/or going to parties...
The downside of this approach is that you specialise very early - basically you choose at 14. Which is great if you know what you want to do and not so good if you don't. This is aggravated by UK Universities traditionally having very focused courses e.g. I did a CS course and all we had was 4 years of Computer Science and Maths classes with some Statistics for light relief. Again this is great if you pick the right course and dreadful if you make a mistake.
[NB I have a 14 year old son and we've just been through the trauma of picking Standard Grade courses]
FYI Here is a exam paper for an Advanced Higher in Computing, which I think is pretty good:
http://www.sqa.org.uk/pastpapers/papers/papers/2012/AH_Compu...
Re: Reinventing the School
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not only that, but doubling the pay of teachers will only improve your results if you get rid of your current teachers. Which will be difficult to do. Otherwise you are just paying the same people more money and probably getting the same results.
Based them, in some way, on standardized test scores?
Re: Reinventing the School
#50Good ideas, but lets just not have classrooms / teachers - just learn online and then come in to use teacher as consultant
The first thing that needs doing is to decouple learning speed and interests from the classroom, and to invert the teacher relationship from being the mass transmitter to being a consultant an coach.
Educational software will almost always be able to explain any particular subject better than the teacher who is located near you, but you still need to learn how to use that educational software, how to focus (or not) your interests, how to interact with online communities, and know what to do when things go wrong.