School Choice/Vouchers (split from '7 point Drain the Swamp')

[zoogs]

BRB, I'll admit I'm very lightly read on the teacher tenure subject. When I do read about it, I tend to agree more with the pros of tenure (see Cecelia's comment, which also emphasizes a point fun has been bringing up and with which I agree: it comes down to how competently schools are being administrated. Shielding teachers from internal politicking and getting cut for earning too much also seem like important reasons to maintain it.)

But, supposing that we do have a problem where there aren't enough quality teachers. The goal should be to attract higher quality people to the profession to begin with, right? Policy measures designed to be punitive in mind, to me, seems like they would largely have the opposite effect. It would drive some of the best away.

And I do agree we have a problem with getting our best to go -- and stay -- in teaching. As for why different than another job, off the top of my head, university faculty get tenure also. Teaching young minds is fundamentally different from delivering value to a company's stakeholders. And it's a taxpayer-funded enterprise for the public good.

I suppose I've seen my share of poor teachers but really, on balance, I've mostly fond memories and have had many good ones. The limiting factor is affluence of the town, IMO.

 

[teachercd]

I'm sure that's how it's viewed from the teachers side.

However, why should they be different than another job?

In the economic down turn of 2007-2011, our company had to down size to survive.

We looked at the employee base and got rid of the bottom feeders and kept the best employees.

Sometimes that "best employee" was one that had been here a year over someone that has been here 5-10 years.

Why shouldn't a school system be able to do the same?

We rewarded the best employees we had and the company is stronger because of it.

Ps...your last sentence about "worth a damn" is interesting.

so you were just able to get rid of the worst performers? And you could just keep the best ones?
Why didn't you and the other management do a better job with the poor performing employees so that they would also be some of the top performing ones? How come you weren't able to have all the employees performing at a strong level at a high-level? Was it a leadership issue?

 

[funhusker]

BRB, my "worth a damn" isn't interesting, it's true. There are teachers that suck. They are just bad at it for whatever reason. They are weeded out very quickly, my guess is 90% of bad teachers recognize it themselves and quit. (edit: teaching isn't a job you can be bad at and enoy. Unless you are doing something inappropriate which "tenure" doesn't matter)

The rest of your post I can't argue against. Teachers are unionized. We negotiate and come to terms with a district. Will that last much longer? I don't know. But right now it does and I'm just passing on information. Do I think a qualified teacher should be given preference? Yes. I was the teacher from Dept. X. I had to find a new job. But as a union member, I know what I sign up for. And the benefits to a "good teacher" from that union outweigh the benefits to a "bad teacher" in my opinion.

It's not much different than a unionized automaker, electrician, or plumber. It really boils down to the question of how a person feels about unionized labor when talking about teacher job security.

 

[Mierin]

Teaching is different than other professions because the pay to importance ratio is really low. Everyone in the U.S. attends school. It's vital that we do a good job in education. And we pay the people we're expecting to make it happen as if what they're doing isn't important. I could go on about how many extra hours teachers have to put in but I won't.

I'm all for making it easier to fire bad teachers if we increase the salary enough to attract more good teachers. Since I got a minor in education I took many of the classes that people have to take in order to become teachers. Almost all of them were a joke that anyone could pass without much effort or intelligence. There are smart teachers out there but you don't need to be smart to become one. But they can't raise the standards much because teachers aren't paid enough

 

[BigRedBuster]

I'm sure that's how it's viewed from the teachers side.

However, why should they be different than another job?

In the economic down turn of 2007-2011, our company had to down size to survive.

We looked at the employee base and got rid of the bottom feeders and kept the best employees.

Sometimes that "best employee" was one that had been here a year over someone that has been here 5-10 years.

Why shouldn't a school system be able to do the same?

We rewarded the best employees we had and the company is stronger because of it.

Ps...your last sentence about "worth a damn" is interesting.

so you were just able to get rid of the worst performers? And you could just keep the best ones?
Why didn't you and the other management do a better job with the poor performing employees so that they would also be some of the top performing ones? How come you weren't able to have all the employees performing at a strong level at a high-level? Was it a leadership issue?

Every single employee group has bad, good, better, best employees. Teachers are no different and our company is no different. We constantly are working to improve the employee base through who we hire, train, get rid of...etc.

To explain our situation will take some explaining but, I don't want to bore you with the fine details. The short story is, in 2006, our company had gone through some years of very fast growth. We are also in an area with very very low unemployment. So...during that time, we were forced to bring in employees that typically we probably wouldn't have hired. It was the typical "warm body" theory. We needed people. Then, 2007 hit and within 2 years, are sales were basically cut in half.

So, we had the opportunity to get rid of the "warm bodies" and keep the best. Also, don't get me wrong. Most of the time, the employee with the most experience with the company was the one we kept. But, there were a few situations where the employee with the most years with the company was not the best employee.

 

[BigRedBuster]

Before we get deeper into this discussion, I want to make it clear, I am not blaming bad teachers as the sole reason some schools are bad or why some students don't learn. I think I have made it clear earlier in this thread that parents take a huge responsibility in making sure their child is coming to school with the right attitude and prepared to learn.

I also don't have this view that American public schools are horrible and the entire system needs to be torn apart.

That said....let me try to combine all my thoughts on education.

First and foremost, I believe that failing schools are a symptom of failing communities. They are not the CAUSE of those failed communities. The school system is only going to be successful if the community supports it and the parents in that community do what is necessary to send kids into the system with the right attitude of respect for others (including teachers) and with the right attitude that learning is important. This starts with the parents raising the kids to understand the end game of education. Maybe the kid is preparing to go to college, get a job, join the military. Too many kids just go to school and go through the motions with absolutely no goal in life beyond the next day. Once kids understand and think of the future, school becomes more meaningful and thus they will take it more seriously.

From there, the education system can do some things to help themselves out too.

a) They must have the ability to separate out kids who are there only to cause problems. There are schools in the US where I would be scared to death to send my kid because I would fear for their safety. How in the heck is a teacher supposed to actually teach bright young kids in that type of an environment. They all know the kids who are causing the problems and dealing drugs or causing violence. Get those kids out of the system of the general student population. School should be a safe place where kids who want to learn can go do just that. Don't get me wrong. I'm still in favor of attempting to educate all kids. But, when a kid or group of kids are holding everyone else back, something needs to happen.

b) Like I have said, the school also needs to have a system where they can continually improve their staff. I am all for improving the pay for GOOD teachers. I have had some teachers when i was growing up are worth an incredible amount of money for what they did for kids they came into contact with in their classes. One of them just won an election to the state board of education.

Like I have said, all employee groups have a bad, good, better, best level of competence. Just because someone is in a job X number of years, shouldn't mean they are untouchable. Maybe the administration that was in place in their first three years did suck. Maybe a new administration is there now that is good and wants to improve. That new administration should be able to get rid of dead weight, replace them with teachers that are good at motivating kids and teaching them. They then should have the funds and ability to reward the best teachers without having to also give unwarranted raises to teachers that don't deserve it.

Let's say the starting wage for a new teacher out of college is $30,000 and over the next 10 years, the typical contract allows them to get up to $50,000. (I have no clue what the real numbers are. Just using these for an example). Now, In this example, let's say all teachers started the same day to keep it simple. There will be some bad teachers that get replaced. There will be some that perform decent and rightfully so are kept on and get the typical raises. Now....let's say there are 8 teachers in the system that are exceptional. They go above and beyond just standing there and spewing out crap for kids to take notes. Kids truly are motivated and inspired by these teachers and become better people. Why shouldn't the system be able to pay THESE teachers say $100,000 per year? (yes, I'm assuming it's funded. Funding is not a part of this example). But....let's also say there is a teacher that was decent but after 5 years lost the desire to give a crap. They should be able to get rid of that teacher and hopefully get one that ends up making $100,000.

Continually improve by rewarding the best and getting rid of the worst.

PS...also...I am not in favor of just shutting down schools that don't perform. I would think those schools are there for a reason. There are kids that need educated. If schools are not performing, administrations should be replaced and then given the power to do what is necessary to improve the system. But....the tough part is....it still gets back to the community around the school.

 

[teachercd]

BRB, you have some really good stuff (which you know) in those posts and some really lame stuff (which you know). It is really impressive on both ends and I like a lot of your ideas.