How would you fix the American public education system?

[FairProspects]

To the PP that said to start all teachers out at 85K a year. The median income for the US is approx $46,000 a year. Why should teachers be paid anymore, than average when starting out?

 

My husband has never made more than $46,000 in a year, we manage to educate our children, and send 3 to college.

 

Yes, but you are blessed to live in a low cost of living area. The median income for the U.S.($46,000) is only a bit more than half the average wage in my area (around $72,000 a year).

 

I'm agreeing with you that teachers should make an average professional wage for the area, but in high COLA areas, it should be adjusted upward, just as private wages are. Teachers have the same educational expenses (maybe more with the upkeep of their skills and the rising cost of tuition), same housing and food expenses as anyone else. They have spent years gaining education and experience. Are they less deserving of an average standard of living than an engineer or other professional with the same qualifications in another field simply because they teach?

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

Okay. They haven't been taught correctly. ;)

 

There is tons of evidence about this. About 95% of kids that have been diagnosed with reading disability can learn to read if they are taught correctly from the beginning. The number is much lower if you wait until they are behind and then try to remediate. They may never read as quickly, or comprehend as well, but they CAN learn to read, usually at least at grade level.

 

Very, very few schools are doing it right.

 

:iagree: I keep reading about how the methods used in teaching reading are causing problems and I believe it:) I believe wholeheartedly in a very strong phonics program for all children.

[lgm]

Yes, but you are blessed to live in a low cost of living area. The median income for the U.S.($46,000) is only a bit more than half the average wage in my area (around $72,000 a year).

 

I'm agreeing with you that teachers should make an average professional wage for the area, but in high COLA areas, it should be adjusted upward, just as private wages are. Teachers have the same educational expenses (maybe more with the upkeep of their skills and the rising cost of tuition), same housing and food expenses as anyone else. They have spent years gaining education and experience. Are they less deserving of an average standard of living than an engineer or other professional with the same qualifications in another field simply because they teach?

 

If you can get the salary grid for teachers and compare that to civil service workers in your area, it would be insightful. Do remember that teachers work, per contract, 4 hrs in classroom and 1.5 hr out of classroom daily, only 5 days/week max and only 180 days per year - several of which are half days. There is no mandatory, unpaid overtime (engineers are exempt). Here the union enforces working to contract, and the district supplies clerks to stand by a scantron and feed it tests and quizzes to grade. Engineers go into teaching for the stability, the hours (no beeper, no mandatory on-call and less than a 40 hr work week..yeah!!), and the bennies, especially the maternity leave (all that the district approves and you never lose your job no matter how long you stay out) and retirement bennies. Check out this fella's opinions and data: http://www.myshortpencil.com/teachersalaries.htm

Edited November 23, 2009 by lgm

[mirth]

To the PP that said to start all teachers out at 85K a year. The median income for the US is approx $46,000 a year. Why should teachers be paid anymore, than average when starting out?

 

Because once teaching as a profession pays well and you get to (must) fire all the existing teachers and re-hire positions from an open applicant pool, then lawyers, surgeons, research scientists, college professors, and other area experts (such as farmers, ranchers, prof musicians) will want the same positions. If you have a critical mass of smart professionals who say, "Wow you mean I don't have to work 70 hours a week and be on-call and deal with my demanding clients who call me at night and on vacation, who try all they can to weasel out of paying me, and their crises, I don't have to write proposals and publish or perish, and I can just teach kids what I know in a classroom. DEAL!!!", then the toppling and reform becomes inevitable. At some point there will be a critical mass highly-motivated, highly-paid, and intelligent employees who will recognize the pedagogy for what it it -- broken and full of deadwood, and work to eliminate it knowing that this just ain't how it works in the real world. And the teachers who landed jobs in this pool will be the best of the best and feel like they can really accomplish something and be duly rewarded.

 

Because a well-educated people benefits 99% of the people, just as a poorly educated populace hurts 99% of everyone.

 

Because such employees would not see the value of the NEA.

 

Or there could be a rule that every elected official must place their kids and grandkids into a random ps within their district for their entire term in office drawn from a random televised lottery.

Edited November 23, 2009 by mirth

[Perry]

:iagree:

 

Let's be clear. 80% of kids in special ed are NOT simply there because they were not taught properly.

 

I don't think it's at all clear.

 

http://www.educationsector.org/analysis/analysis_show.htm?doc_id=509392

 

Nearly half of the students served under IDEA are classified as having "specific learning disabilities." This classification, often referred to as "learning disabled," or LD, is vaguely defined under IDEA as "an imperfect ability to listen, think, speak, read, write, spell, or to do mathematical calculations," and it is often described as a discrepancy between a student's intelligence level and his or her performance in the classroom.2

 

The LD diagnosis is intended to provide students with the supports they need to reach grade-level standards. Similarly, students with disabilities that fall into the categories of "emotional disturbance," "speech or language impairments," and "other health impairments" (which includes attention deficit disorder or ADD) can be expected to overcome or compensate for the disability with appropriate services.3 Over 80 percent of students enrolled in special education fall into these four categories.

These categories also are among those with the largest increases in student diagnoses over the years. Chart 2 shows the rise in students with disabilities as a proportion of the total student population and the change in the prevalence of disability types.

 

 

Overall, the percent of students with disabilities in the United States has grown from just over 8 percent of the total student population in 1977 to nearly 14 percent in 2006. But this increase has not been uniform across all disability types. The biggest increases have been in the "specific learning disabilities" category, which grew over 200 percent during this time; the "other health-impairments" category, which began to increase in 1991 when the federal definition was expanded to include ADD and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD); and in autism, which has increased partly due to an expanded definition that includes children with milder forms of the disorder.4

The increase in students identified as having disabilities is a reflection of a variety of factors, including an increased acceptance of the "disabled" label among parents and students, a better understanding of disabilities, and changes in the definition of what qualifies as a disability.

But some researchers have argued that the increased prevalence of students with disabilities, particularly in the broad "specific learning disabilities" category is also a result of over-identification. Here, schools may improperly identify low-performing students as learning disabled for a variety of reasons: to get additional state funding for special education, to avoid accountability for these students because the special education label has historically exempted these students from such measures, or more simply, because the vague definition of a disorder leads to misidentification or because teachers are trying to get additional help for struggling students.5 Added flexibility to NCLB's accountability for the performance of special education students could mean that many of these misidentified students will not be required to reach grade-level standards.

 

A conservative estimate would be the 45% diagnosed with LD. But most of the stuff I've read estimates it higher than that, since a large proportion of the other groups have reading problems that would not have been present if they had had early intervention.

[lionfamily1999]

Okay. They haven't been taught correctly. ;)

 

There is tons of evidence about this. About 95% of kids that have been diagnosed with reading disability can learn to read if they are taught correctly from the beginning. The number is much lower if you wait until they are behind and then try to remediate. They may never read as quickly, or comprehend as well, but they CAN learn to read, usually at least at grade level.

 

Very, very few schools are doing it right.

Ok, agree. I also think that other 5% should be remembered and not beaten over the head with it. Ime, folks with anything under the average range feel bad enough, without having to be reminded of it every.single.time they go to school/work.

 

:grouphug:

 

It just hurts to see the smaller percentages forgotten about is all.

[Perry]

He was in a contained learning center and most students were autistic, had cerebral palsy, mild mental retardation or other physical/mental disabilities. He did have a few kids who had post-traumatic stress syndrome or oppositional defiance disorder from an abusive situation or something, but I can't think of a single student during his time there that was special ed because of a reading/instructional system failure. This is a gross fallacy.

Well, I would *hope* they aren't putting the LD kids in a contained classroom with MR and autistic kids! They should be in the reading resource room. Maybe that's why he didn't see them.

[Perry]

Also, I got sidetracked by the special education focus. I also mentioned IEPs in my initial post. I can't find a national breakdown of IEP by category, but I found one for Pennsylvania. Statewide, 66.2% were classified LD, and 15.8% were Speech/Language impaired. Frequently (I can't give a number) kids with SLI have preventable reading problems.

 

ETA:

 

I sorted those by county, and found a huge range: a high of 89% down to 3.9% LD. Those with lower LD have higher SLI. I think they are just calling it by a different name.

Edited November 23, 2009 by Perry

[FairProspects]

I don't think it's at all clear.

 

Well, we may have to agree to disagree :). If this site is stating that students with "emotional disturbances" (mental health problems like oppositional defiance disorder, fetal alcohol, etc.), and processing difficulties like ADD are included in the 80% figure, and you are arguing that this category is caused by poor reading instruction, then we definitely disagree.

 

These are children with mental health & processing difficulties, defined medical issues, which may have a significant impact on their ability to read & learn completely independent of their reading instruction. I do agree that schools probably throw some of their poorly performing students in with the rest of these diagnoses so that they are exempt from some of the adequate yearly progress goals.

[Perry]

If this site is stating that students with "emotional disturbances" (mental health problems like oppositional defiance disorder, fetal alcohol, etc.), and processing difficulties like ADD are included in the 80% figure, and you are arguing that this category is caused by poor reading instruction, then we definitely disagree.

I'm saying some of the kids in this category have preventable reading failure. Not all. I'm saying *most* of the kids in the categories called LD and SLI have preventable reading failure. We can bicker about whether that's 60% or 80 % or whatever, but I don't think there is any doubt that the single largest category of kids with an IEP have it because they have a preventable reading disorder.

 

And that doesn't even include the even larger number of kids that have preventable reading failure that don't have an IEP.

[Caribbean Queen]

Do remember that teachers work, per contract, 4 hrs in classroom and 1.5 hr out of classroom daily, only 5 days/week max and only 180 days per year - several of which are half days. There is no mandatory, unpaid overtime (engineers are exempt). Here the union enforces working to contract, and the district supplies clerks to stand by a scantron and feed it tests and quizzes to grade.

 

When I was a school teacher I worked 52 hours a week. School was from 8-3 and I had to stay until 4:00. I had to work from home about 12 hours a week to keep up with lesson planning and grading.