Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Tuesday, Jan. 25, 2011 | 12:22 a.m.
Beyond the Sun
Grim, with arms crossed, the 80 teachers and education personnel watching Gov. Brian Sandoval’s budget address Monday night weren’t expecting good news.
Still, there were no groans or shaking of fists from those gathered at the teachers’ union headquarters in Las Vegas.
When the governor proposed cutting spending per pupil by 9 percent, or $270, there were some grimaces. The moans would come later when union leaders spoke.
There was some murmuring when Sandoval talked about “education reform” of an “antiquated system.” And there was more grumbling about ending teacher tenure.
During the speech, the loudest applause came when Sandoval said he planned $10 million for the Millennium Scholarships.
After the speech, Ruby Caliendo, 40, a science teacher at Orr Middle School, said she was “very disappointed” in the governor’s speech.
“I disagree with him completely that our system is broken. It’s not our system, it’s the preparation of our kids these days. For my school, is it my fault that students come to me in the eighth grade and read at a second grade level?” (Sandoval said Monday he wants to end social promotion from the third grade, holding back students who can’t yet read at that grade level.)
Caliendo also worried that class sizes would rise sharply with teacher layoffs. She said she has 30 science students in a room built for 24. If the number rises to 40, she will lack enough lab equipment and “I’ll be teaching chemistry with pencil and paper.”
Gary Peck, union executive director, told the teachers, to loud applause, that the governor’s speech was “a recipe for disaster.” He added that it was an assault on public education and collective bargaining.
Ruben Murillo, president of the Clark County teachers union, agreed and said the governor’s address was a “public flogging” of teachers: “I felt like I was getting lifted up and slapped around.”
Nearly 90 percent of a school district’s budget goes to salaries for teachers, administrators and support personnel.
There are nearly 28,000 public school teachers in Nevada, with an average annual salary of nearly $48,000.
Its a good start.
When social promotion from the third grade ends, we'll be seeing a lot more third graders driving to school.
A few things to address:
1. Teachers who work their butts off have nothing to fear from loss of tenure. The teachers that get tenure, kick back and start passing out worksheets all day every day are the ones that should be worried.
2. If we're expected, in the future, to show results via standardized testing or other improvements throughout the year, then the district must come up with a policy on transfers (for example, no transferring allowed outside the first week of a new quarter). I refuse to be responsible for the results of a student that I received in class one week ago and is now taking a test I am supposed to spend the entire quarter or semester preparing them for.
3. Teacher salary based on results? I have no fear of this, IF parents are also held accountable. In grades K-8 especially, children who simply do not attend school on a regular basis because their parents aren't making them (believe me, it happens!) should be fined. Parents whose children are regularly suspended for infringing on the rights of others through constant classroom disruption should be fined. If teachers are expected to take a financial hit if they can't teach, why aren't we taking a stronger stance on expecting parents to PARENT? Don't tell me you can't "make" your child sit down and do his or her homework. Don't tell me that there are zero consequences at home when your child is suspended because they told a teacher to F off. When the school has support from home and stellar teachers in the classroom, the child is truly able to accomplish amazing things.
Talking in generalities is almost never a good start. If you don't know where you are going and haven't worked through the details of the route, you end up lost, late, and out of gas.
Cuts to K-12 and cuts to higher ed. Its pretty obvious that Governor Stupid is intent on providing Nevada a future workforce in his own image!
We have a "higher" education system in Nevada that takes anyone from the state that has barely scraped through our high school system. This is never a good idea and always makes a substandard school. Raising tuition is a good idea, then you will have people decide if the attending UNLV and these other colleges are worth it for them. If these students do not feel that paying a small portion of the cost of their degree is worth it for them, then that is perfect because the public was paying a larger portion of the cost and it obviously is not worth it for us.
Teacher pay in Nevada, if you have been in a district for a number of years, has lagged dramatically behind the majority of the country.
When the boom was at it's height, they HAD to increase salaries in order to attract the huge number of teachers needed to serve the multitudes, or no sane person would come to teach here.
So, salaries came up. To around the middle of the pack.
http://www.leg.state.nv.us/Division/Rese......
Of course, those new teachers were also paying over-inflated prices to buy in if they chose to make a commitment and own a home here. So now,
they are making less money, owe more than their home is worth if they bought, and are looking at the stark reality of Governor B.S. throwing the A-Bomb at school districts.
Additionally, there will be less money going to the already cash-strapped school systems.
Agree with Dennis/Dipstick here that B.S. sounded a whole lot like an NPRI Libbertarrian...
"Larger class sizes, 'no problemo!' facts back up our assertion that in other countries, class size does not matter!"
"Vouchers are great fun and foster competion!"
Well, that's a whole lotta hooey.
http://www.takepart.com/news/2009/03/04/......
These are nothing but subsidies for rich people.
Per-pupil spending, already anemic at best, will take another hit. I know, I know, "jeez, how much money we gotta throw down that hole before we see results!" Well, the answer to that is MORE, not LESS. When you are near the bottom, and you start to cut, where does that leave us....let's calculate:
CLOSER TO THE BOTTOM!
Of course money ISN'T the ONLY thing, but it's sure one of the important ones.
Check out this link from Ralston's column a short while back... if you want to gain at least a glimpse of why Nevader is sucking at Education, take a SERIOUS LOOK at this "Chances for Success" set of graphs:
http://media.lasvegassun.com/media/pdfs/......
The cuts to Higher Ed is a whole other story, one of sticking our youth with more debt burden, while getting less of an education in the bargain.
Bottom line:
We are winning the Race to the Bottom, BIG TIME, and this will so NOT HELP!
GSNW And gmag39 hit it right on the head!
Gmag, its not how much you spend that matters, but how effectively you spend what you already have.
As for tenure and seniority a whole bunch of people right and left believe it has to go - including the group Democrats for Education Reform and oh President Obama.
Vouchers are also extremely beneficial to the poor. 9 out of 11 random assignment studies show statistically significant improvement in student achievement. 0 show students are harmed. 1 of the 2 that showed nothing barely missed the marked for statistical significance but saw a massive, massive, massive gain in graduation rates.
Vouchers work. There are no ifs ands or buts about it.
@PatrickGibbons: "9 out of 11 random assignment studies show statistically significant improvement in student achievement."
Significant improvement in student achievement for whom? The students who had parents who cared about their education? All I can say to that is "well, duh." That's a no-brainer.
How are vouchers working for those students whose parents don't do a thing with their kids?
Sad story...working with some kindergarten kids one-on-one to provide extra help, I told the kids that I wanted them to practice a certain skill at home until I saw them again. I asked if their mom or dad could help them. The answer from a couple of them? "No, my mom is too busy watching her shows." Based on the lack of skills these students possess, it is readily apparent that their parents haven't ever read to their kids or done any of the necessary things that good parents do to start their kid off on a good foot with regard to education.
Every time we (the public) gave teachers raises, we saw the quality of education rise! Oh wait, no we didn't.
I am fortunate to work at a school full of parents that are willing and able to support their children's education. I am so grateful for this. I mean I have students who are able to take educational trips to foreign countries. Is it right that I benefit financially over a teacher in a different community with less parental involvement (to support GSNW's point in another way)? Shouldn't those teachers who have chosen to work with less-privileged students be the ones that get a reward?
@Patrick_R_Gibbons - The problem though is that there ARE, in fact, ifs ands or buts about the success of voucher programs, especially regarding it's applicability in Clark County.
By subsidizing the education of a few lucky students, you're balancing the budget on the backs of the students who won't receive vouchers and the public school system will continue to fall apart. When your graduation rate is less than 40%, you need to solutions other than vouchers, which continues to chip away at a system that's already the worst in the nation. And what happens when the private schools face overcrowding and the quality of education there begins to suffer as such, too? The voucher program essentially poisons the well of private school education and drains the public schools of any hope it had left.
All I know is that when I have children in the next few years, we'll be moving out of state when it comes time for them to begin school...
Shannon K,
The bulk of these programs were for low-income children only. Others were for special-needs. Not one single program studied was for middle class or wealthy children - in fact, no such voucher program exists in America today.
The participants in the study had to apply for a voucher and were chosen by lottery. In other words we've taken care of the "parents who care" variable.
The results show that children who win a voucher and use it to attend a private school have statistically significant higher learning gains than the kids who applied (and thus, presumably have parents who care enough) but did not win a voucher.
Finally, I really really hate the blame parents first crowd. Sure, there are going to be bad parents, but when you're a low-income parent who is struggling to survey getting beat up by people who say you don't care about your own children..it is the last thing they deserve to hear. The blame parents crowd is racist and elitist - even if they don't realize it.
@PatrickGibbons: You said it right there, "The participants in the study had to apply for a voucher and were chosen by lottery." In other words, the parents who cared about their child's education applied for a voucher. So, yeah, that supports my argument, not yours.
I grew up in a low-income household whose parents were struggling to survive, but I did very well in school. It's readily apparent to teachers and anyone else who is dealing with kids whose parents have read to them and push them to do well in school. That's going to be your #1 indicator of who does well in school. That's going to be true in at-risk schools as well as those in better neighborhoods. There's nothing racist or elitist about that. It's just a fact.
The fault lies in the lack of parenting SKILL, not parenting, Gaboon. They try by giving the kid some toys. Do they help them learn to read, Mr. Gaboon? The answer is quite evident from the stats you so love to quote.
Are the children offered a chance to improve themselves in math, science, composition, art, music, physical education, place-based understanding of the planet, its resources, energy forms, applications or social etiquette? Of course they are. "Eat this cereal;it ain't cheap!"
My grandkids can square two-digit numbers, write paragraphs that are concise and comprehensive, detailed and general enough to be informative and well documented. They speak and write in sentences. They can learn new words from prefix, root and suffix. And the twins are 4.
These things occur naturally as parents with some home-made skill have devoted their lives to becoming the parents they want to be. Do you think this is strange and unusual???
In Newvada, absolutely. In America circa 2011, it's quite common - look at your holy STATS, Qunt
"The blame parents crowd is racist and elitist - even if they don't realize it." - Patrick R. Gibbons
I completely disagree. Racism and elitism have nothing to do with basic expectations, such as:
1. Make sure your child goes to school. Adopting the attitude that they only have to attend when they feel like it, or once every 15 days to avoid auto-withdrawal, is insane. It happens in both low and high income households, in white and minority households. There are at least a few of these kids in our middle school every year, and they are a diverse group. If your child does not COME TO SCHOOL, he or she stands a poor chance of LEARNING THE MATERIAL and GRASPING THE CONCEPTS.
2. Make sure your child treats his/her fellow students and teachers with respect and kindness. Parents should impress upon their children that respecting others (not just adults) and being kind to everyone is important. Telling a teacher or fellow student to F off is not appropriate. Threatening teachers and fellow students is not appropriate. And please, if your child makes a mistake and does something unacceptable, please discuss it with them at home to reinforce the point. If your child calls someone the N-word in class and then you tell him at home that it's okay, how have you helped the situation? When we conference with parents of kids that have major attitude problems, it's usually the case that the apple=tree, and this happens, again, to people of all races and economic backgrounds.
3. Make sure you are monitoring your child's progress. If the school sends home a paper to sign, don't call and complain that you don't "have time" to help your child with his or her organizational skills. Please don't tell us you can't "make" your child sit down and do some homework, don't plead ignorance about your child's assignments, and don't accept "I dunno" from your child when they come home. If there are repercussions at home for a lack of responsibility, responsibility will generally manifest itself. Parents can teach their kids that it is important to be accountable. Hey, parents can be teachers too! What a revelation.
Of these three expectations, NOT ONE contains a single racial or socioeconomic bias. Not one stacks the deck against people who come from less, or have less. All that is required is that people want good things for their children, and understand that with education comes freedom. If parents would work hard to accomplish the three expectations listed above, 80% of the problems we encounter would be much more easily managed. We are trying to set your children up for success.
Tenure appeals to my sense of political correctness about as much as 'the bundle of rights' that includes home ownership.
Although I owned a bunch of property in my life, sold a whole bunch, built houses and high-rises and did ok, even sold a bunch of mortgages, it still sticks in my craw - this notion of possession of land. It is wrong-headed and part of our culture, a part that doesn't truly square with this instinct of passing through life on a planet passing through space.
Same thing with tenure. Okay today but tomorrow, teachers get lazy or as others duly note, pass out some handouts/worksheets and let their students' creative and curious nature wilt and die.
It hampers the little ones to have to tolerate sloth, incompetence and laminated lesson plans.
If the kids aren't frothing at the mouth and their time awareness is completely absent, then they're wasting time. A kid in the Flow will forget time. A kid in boredom will watch a clock. Tenure actually contributes to poorer participation. Sorry teachers, but instinct wins.
Mihaly C.
I agree with you GSNW, and I do think that it is parenting skills more than parenting. I respect any parent that does what they have to do to provide for their families, and I had many friends when I was growing up who had parents that had to work around the clock to provide for them, but at the same time, those kids still grew up learning how to work hard and respect others. I don't think it has to do with race or socioeconomic class, it's how you raise your children and the values that you give and make important to them, because there are great kids and bad kids in all social classes, so you really can't pinpoint one class as a problem.
I also don't agree with paycuts for teachers, especially if they're not taking a paycut so that the district has more money to hire extra teachers. I think that a higher student to teacher ratio would create more of a problem in the education system. How can a teacher possibly be expected to pay close attention and keep tabs on a class of 40 at a time? Smaller class sizes allows for more individual attention and understanding for each student, therefore helping to identify their educational needs to give them the tools to get them where they need to be. While I didn't necessarily agree with Sandoval's proposed plan, I do like that he wants to put a merit based system in place. Kids that work hard should be rewarded and incentivised, however, I think it is almost like a trap for a teacher; how can they be expected to produce results when they are expected to be taking on such a large class size.
Mr. Lamy,
Parental income and education are great predictors of their child's success, but blaming parents is smoke and mirrors to let bad teachers off.
you see, you can't control the parents, you can control the quality of the teacher. Also, being poor and uneducated doesn't mean you don't care about your children - only elitist jerks or people who don't think before they speak make such comments.
Research at the University of Tennessee found that teacher quality was 10 to 20x more effective at improving student achievement than small class sizes.
In other words, teacher quality is the single most important factor school districts can control.
The recent LA Times analysis on teacher quality showed that the racial income gap can be closed by a student having 3 years in a row of top quartile teachers. A mere three years and an achievement gap that persists throughout the country throughout all schooling, GONE, because of improved teacher quality.
Shannon K,
Nope, it supports my position. Let me explain.
You believe that parents caring is what makes the difference in vouchers.
The problem is you have to apply for the voucher program - thus ALL participants (whether they get a voucher or not) have parents who allegedly care more than the parents who did not apply.
By randomly selecting among the parents who care we can rule out parental involvement as one of the causes of success.
The results show that kids who win the voucher and go to a private school do better than kids who lose the voucher and remain in the public school. In other words the variable we are testing is the school itself - public or private.
Neither here nor there,
First, vouchers should be available for all students but if not, then for low-income students is acceptable to me.
Second, the average private school tuition is less than public school operating costs - so in all liklihood it will be enough. If it is not, shall we get rid of food stamps on the same ground (food stamps don't cover the full cost of food)?
Third, 18 out of 19 studies show that the systemic effects of vouchers, that is what happens to the system itself, when vouchers are made available, demonstrate that public schools improve when faced with the competition.
Thus, the students who are "left behind" get a better education as the school works to avoid losing more students (and thus dollars) to their private sector competitors.
Kids win with a better education either way.
I'm okay with huge education cuts. My property taxes are too high.
@PatrickGibbons: I've been doing a bunch of reading this afternoon and what I've been finding shows that there is a statistically insignificant difference between those who applied for vouchers and got accepted and those who didn't. I certainly haven't found the study you've been talking about.
Pat,
For several years I was the guy teaching the dropouts who caught fire, became scholars and marched into university classes with their heads held high. I am familiar with building fires inside of people who have the raw stuff.
Of course my kids completed three years of six subjects in eight weeks or twenty, but it is NOT my skill that fired them up anymore than a drunk dies from the last bottle. It's the first twenty thousand that killed him, and my rearrangement of kindling and heat, air and attention only served to FOCUS on what was already there to begin with.
When the kids are age 2, mom and dad ought to be into their little heads; in lousy family situations, it ain't happenin' bro. The kids are squandering the moments that truly matter.
Sure, you are absolutely right on target, Pat, with tenure being a tossable notion whose departure will benefit the youngins. And sure you are also right on target with the fact that quality of instruction is the key.
But what seems to pass as parenting skill needs to be addressed as teaching or creating learning processes, curiosity-gone-cavorting into reality or adventures in getting how this place works.
It ain't just feeding, wiping and Christmas that develops those youngins so much as nurturing, stimulating and gratifying. Gratitude erupts with grokking the fabric, seeing the beauty and understanding the punch line. The low skilled kindergartner is cheated as much as the poorly fed.
Well said, Joe.
I'm saying we can't blame parenting as the only reason, or even a major reason, why education quality is low.
Are there bad parents? Yes. Will there always be bad parents? Yes.
Are their bad teachers? Yes. Will there always be bad teachers? No, we don't have to accept that.
Bad parenting is A problem, bad teachers ARE a problem, bad administers ARE a problem, a broken system that protects special interest groups, IS a problem.
Shannon K,
What have you read?
Here are some studies on the systemic effects:
Milwaukee
Martin Carnoy, et al "Vouchers and Public School Performance," Economic Policy Institute, October 2007;
Rajashri Chakrabarti, "Can Increasing Private School Participation and Monetary Loss in a Voucher Program Affect Public School Performance? Evidence from Milwaukee," Federal Reserve Bank of New York, 2007; (forthcoming in the Journal of Public Economics)
Caroline Minter Hoxby, "The Rising Tide," Education Next, Winter 2001;
Jay P. Greene and Ryan H. Marsh, "The Effect of Milwaukee's Parental Choice Program on Student Achievement in Milwaukee Public Schools," School Choice Demonstration Project Report, March 2009.
Florida
Rajashri Chakrabarti "Vouchers, Public School Response and the Role of Incentives: Evidence from Florida" Federal Reserve Bank of New York Staff Report, Number 306, October 2007;
Jay P. Greene and Marcus A. Winters, "Competition Passes the Test," Education Next, Summer 2004;
Cecilia Elena Rouse, Jane Hannaway, Dan Goldhaber, and David Figlio, "Feeling the Heat: How Low Performing Schools Respond to Voucher and Accountability Pressure," CALDER Working Paper 13, Urban Institute, November 2007;
Martin West and Paul Peterson, "The Efficacy of Choice Threats Within School Accountability Systems," Harvard PEPG Working Paper 05-01, March 23, 2005; (subsequently published in The Economic Journal, March, 2006)
Jay P. Greene and Marcus A. Winters, "The Effect of Special Education Vouchers on Public School Achievement: Evidence From Florida's McKay Scholarship Program" Manhattan Institute, Civic Report Number 52, April 2008.
here are some on individual students randomly assigned to vouchers
Cowen, Joshua M. 2008. "School Choice as a Latent Variable: Estimating the 'Complier Average Causal Effect' of Vouchers in Charlotte." Policy Studies Journal 36 (2).
Greene, Jay P. 2001. "Vouchers in Charlotte," Education Matters 1 (2):55-60.
Greene, Jay P., Paul E. Peterson, and Jiangtao Du. 1999. "Effectiveness of School Choice: The Milwaukee Experiment." Education and Urban Society, 31, January, pp. 190-213.
Howell, William G., Patrick J. Wolf, David E. Campbell, and Paul E. Peterson. 2002. "School Vouchers and Academic Performance: Results from Three Randomized Field Trials." Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 21, April, pp. 191-217. (Washington, DC: Gains for all participants, almost all were African Americans)
Rouse, Cecilia E. 1998. "Private School Vouchers and Student Achievement: An Evaluation of the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 113(2): 553-602.
Wolf, Patrick, Babette Gutmann, Michael Puma, Brian Kisida, Lou Rizzo, Nada Eissa, and Marsha Silverberg. March 2009. Evaluation of the DC Opportunity Scholarship Program: Impacts After Three Years. U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
The last Wolf study there looks at winning a voucher, not whether or not you used one. The 2009 study found a statistically significant result, the 2010 study did not because the sample size had shrunk and barely missed the confidence interval - the effect size was still the same. That paper also found a very, very large graduation rate improvement in DC among students who used the voucher.
These three find at least one subgroup benefits from vouchers (again no one finds students are harmed by it)
Barnard, John, Constantine E. Frangakis, Jennifer L. Hill, and Donald B. Rubin. 2003. "Principal Stratification Approach to Broken Randomized Experiments: A Case Study of School Choice Vouchers in New York City," Journal of the American Statistical Association 98 (462):299--323. (Gains for African Americans)
Howell, William G., Patrick J. Wolf, David E. Campbell, and Paul E. Peterson. 2002. "School Vouchers and Academic Performance: Results from Three Randomized Field Trials." Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 21, April, pp. 191-217. (Dayton, Ohio: Gains for African Americans)
Peterson, Paul E., and William G. Howell. 2004. "Efficiency, Bias, and Classification Schemes: A Response to Alan B. Krueger and Pei Zhu." American Behavioral Scientist, 47(5): 699-717. (New York City: Gains for African Americans)
those all show statistically significant achievement gains for students. If the effect size or impact is smaller than you think it should be, it is likely only because the programs are limited in scope and size - ie limited to a handful of inner city low-income students, or funding is kept low to prevent real serious competition with public schools.
http://www.k12.com/nvva/
Want an alternative, try K12. Nevada Virtual Academy is run by the Clark County School District. It goes from Kindergarten - 12th grade. Your child is sent a FREE computer, workbooks & textbooks. Your child will thank you for it!
1. Tenure is out.
2. Teacher are tested every year to maintain credentials.
3 . Illegals are not allowed in public school classes. (private schools only)
4. Teach today's children a 2nd language. Not Spanish - Chinese they will need it.
5. Semester teaching only. No (3) summer month vacations anymore.
This is what Japan did after World War II,
@PatrickGibbons: I just looked at the very first study you listed and find that it does not support choice. Bottom line? "We also conclude that for the choice argument to be convincing, advocates need to show more consistent and sustained improvements in student learning and should be able to explain at the operational level how choice induces schools to improve student performance. A more concrete explanation of this one-time increase in test scores is especially needed because the Milwaukee case is one of the few where a significant positive competition effect on student achievement has been found. This study shows that the traditional competition indicators do not seem to provide this explanation. If choice can, at best, produce a one-time improvement, particularly an improvement due to schools taking standardized tests more seriously, this is an effect that can probably be produced by other (possibly lower cost) policies and incentives. Thus, we need a much better explanation of what occurs in both public and private/charter schools when such choice plans are introduced."
I'm not going to waste my time looking at the rest right now. I'll come back to it if I have the time later and feel the need to show how you are cherry-picking your information.
I don't have the time to go through the rest of your
According to the official mouthpiece of the NPRI slant, parents don't have much of an impact, the first years don't matter and it's the dumb teacher's fault.
Three words, Pat - LaJolla High School.
from tarantula:
Parents are a major factor in this problem. While proponents of NPRI claim blaming parents is racist, consider this:
Our 3 kids attended LaJolla High, a public school in San Diego. Many of their classmates were Asian or Indian, and had parents whose foreign-born parents were physicians, lawyers,biochemists or professors at UCSD. Those children consistently scored highest on tests, and every year one or two would score a perfect score on the SAT or ACT test - because their parents took an active role in their education. The graduation rate - in a public school - was around 95 per cent. The school cultivated an active educational partnership with parents for school projects, donations, and volunteer classroom aides.
Holding-back students who don't make the grade IN EVERY GRADE ABOVE SECOND GRADE is the right way to go. Some will call that prospect old-fashioned. But, "old fashioned" sure beats graduating Seniors who are morons. Here's something else "old-fashioned"; let's give teachers more authority to discipline students who are disruptive to classes. And, one more "antiquated" proposal; make teachers' AND ADMINISTRATORS' wages commensurate with their job performance and the achievement rate of their students.
Okay ShannonK,
thanks for noticing that I put my heart into it. Just like your momma obviously did into loving up her little angel in spite of the turmoil and turbulence, the travails of poverty in this land of riches and robbers.
Loving parents turn moments into memories, kids into folks, chances into reality.
Look at you!
Thanks again for the kind words. And thanks for the insight into the Gaboon's statistical burial of my post of the day! I like the way you ended with a
If parents are to blame, then budget cuts won't matter.
Nez212's comment shows the need for well-funded public schools.
@Patrick R. Gibbons;
"Gmag, its not how much you spend that matters, but how effectively you spend what you already have."
That's what they ALWAYS SAY when they do things "on the cheap"...
Of COURSE you want to optimize your dollars.
But you STILL MUST FUND TO A MINIMALLY REASONABLE LEVEL
before you can claim "you should do more with less".
applepie says it's black and white.
Any takers??
Either parents have an impact or it's all on the teacher.
Great insight, applejack. Thanks for the
@ Patrick R. Gibbons;
"I'm saying we can't blame parenting as the only reason, or even a major reason, why education quality is low."
Pat, I KNOW you consider yourself an expert, dude, but this is laughable. And DEAD WRONG.
Of course, it's not the QUALITY of the PRODUCT that is causing kids with bad parents to perform poorly.
It's the social & economical & emotional ramifications of their home life... if you don't believe that's "not even a major reason" why some kids are flunking out, you need to go back to school.
Shannon K,
Speaking of cherry picking you did exactly that. that is a report from a left-wing union organization but it still found a statistically significant improvement in student achievement after 1998 when they allowed religious schools to participate and receive voucher students.
Here is a more recent paper on the same program http://www.uark.edu/ua/der/SCDP/Milwauke...
Gmag,
What is minimally reasonable? You tell me. Get the NSEA to print it. Get Senator Horsford to have it carved in stone.
Then I will take bets to see how long it takes us to surpass that spending amount and how many of you will still be singing the same "WE NEED TO SPEND MORE" tune.
Gmag,
Thanks elitist...parents don't care about their kids which is why an unaccountable, uncompetitive monopoly can't provide a quality service despite having twice as much money per pupil...
Give me a break.
There are bad parents, but its not why American even rich white kids in America stink at math...
@PatrickGibbons: Again, you are the one who posted the study. I just googled it and read it. If you don't want to use things from what you call "left- wing union organizations," then you shouldn't post them in the first place. Good grief.
I have spent hours tutoring basic math, first year algebra and graphing etc. to undergraduates who were severely behind in their class.
Math is only logic, so if the person's mind is stressed, disorganized, unable to focus or irrational because of religious training, etc., they WILL NEVER LEARN MATH.
The fact is, if they hate, fear, despise or see no reason to learn the subject, they won't. Take all those referenced studies and chuck them.
End of discussion.
@SunJon: It also doesn't help when the parents are telling their kid that they themselves are terrible at math. It sets the kid up for failure.
"Bad parenting is A problem, bad teachers ARE a problem, bad administers ARE a problem, a broken system that protects special interest groups, IS a problem." -Gibbons
I would agree wholeheartedly with this. I thin what you are missing is that the most vocal group demanding parent involvement and parent accountability doesn't say that it ALL falls on the parent's shoulders.
If you read what I said to begin with, I am fine being held accountable for MY part so long as parents are held accountable for theirs.
I am here, working my butt off every day, to make sure your kids possess the appropriate knowledge to move to the next level. I am here to teach science. I can also teach responsibility, kindness, and integrity.
PARENTS are supposed to be supporting these ancillary lessons at home. If they are not, the structure weakens. If parents DEFY these lessons, the structure collapses. A broken system doesn't get fixed unless we address all of the broken bits.
Gibbons et.al. Are you or have you recently been in the classroom teaching? If not you can stuff your statistics and reports. Fact. I have hundreds of kids whose parents only care that we are babysitting their kids. Never turn in their work or try? Who cares, just keep them in school so they don't have to deal with them. Students whose parents care, way more attentive and do better work and better on tests. Period. Forget the buzzwords like "elitist" etc. A tiny number of students have used vouchers and had success. Lets have hundred's of thousands of students flood these private schools with 45 in a class instead of 20 and parents who do not stand behind the teachers and ensure the kids care do their work. Learning is hard work, without that ethic, put there by parents, regardless of socioeconomic status just does not exist. My guess is that all the "blame the teachers" crowd are the real elitists, and none of them will be around when a system that blames teachers for everything and takes away their desire to teach. Where are you going to get people to teach under these conditions? Everyone wants the best and brighteset, as long as they come real cheap and are willing to be bullied by people who have statistics and reports under their arm, but no real knowledge of what or how to teach. If you have not been in the classroom, be quiet. I learned because my parents showed me the value of learning, working hard and accomplishing something regardless of whether it is easy or not, and things worth having rarely are. And if I see you call anyone an "elitist" again I will assume you have nothing legitimate to add besides homilies and empty rhetoric.
Exactly pelverud, I agree 100%. I took my child out of regular school to school my child myself. I do not need anyone out there teaching my child, nor do I need a babysitting service. I have spoke to many a parent who told me that they could never have their child home with them. Why not? Did this parent not bring the child into this world? Why should someone else do the work that parents are suppose to do since the beginning of their child's birth? You know how sad it is to see 8th graders who don't know basic math & writing skills? These are kids coming into NVVA ( Nevada Virtual Academy ) from a brick and mortar school. NVVA or Connections Academy are both K12 schools and are both run by the Clark County School District. If parents want their children to learn, they need to take the responsibility and stop complaining.
http://www.k12.com/nvva/
Tenure is not meant to protect bad teachers, it is meant to protect teachers from administrators that won't do their jobs. Are there bad teachers? Absolutely. And as a teacher, I don't want them anywhere near my school. But simply removing tenure is not the answer. It is NOT hard to fire a teacher. All an administrator needs to do is observe the teacher, prove a pattern of bad teaching, and offer a chance to fix it. If the teacher doesn't, then they can be fired.
You also talk about dealing with bad teachers, yet you provide no metric on how to rate teachers. Test scores are an awful metric, because there are so many factors totally unrelated to the teacher. Plus, how do you use math test scores to rate a P.E. teacher? A Social Studies teacher? Every teacher I know are all for more accountability. Nobody that I know of has developed a fair metric that truly rates teacher effectiveness.
Mr. Gibbons, I respect the fact that you have an opinion on how to improve education in Nevada. I completely disagree with you, however. Try doing a teacher's job for awhile, and maybe you will respect us more. I do wonder, though, did you go to a public or private school?
"Nearly 90 percent of a school district's budget goes to salaries for teachers, administrators and support personnel."
You have got to be kidding me.
Less funding than desired is no excuse for not getting the job done. We have plenty of examples of those who do more with less even when lives are at stake.
No one expects teachers to like it and no one expects the teachers union to do anything constructive. We do expect them to roll up their sleeves, quit whining and find a way to get the job done.
And yes, I have teaching experience.
I agree, they need to stop whining and get the job done. I am a salaried employee and if I can get my job done in 40 hours, I do. If it takes 60 hours, I still do it. It's called work ethic.
IMO, These threads seem to bring out the worst in people, making teachers look lazy and greedy.
I am a teacher. Here's my question. We give a parent $5000.00 to send their child to a private school in the form of a voucher. Nevada spends, on average, $7,300.00 per pupil. Who gets the remaining $2,300.00? What a deal for the state if it stays in the general fund? If I governed a state in such financial difficulties as those we face here in Nevada, my rallying cry might just be "GO VOUCHERS!". Now let's hope they spend the savings on other social programs like mental health.
I have been in the classroom when my daughter attended regular school. The teacher's do not have an easy job whatsoever. I commend them for their dedication to teach " other peoples children ". You can sit there and complain, whine, and blame the teachers, administration, our Governor or even our President. Truth be told, raising our children is OUR responsibility, not the responsibility of the school district or the teachers, or the administration. You want a better for your child/ren? Send them to a private school. Can't afford it? Send them to a FREE CCSD virtual online school and school your child from home. It's easy, and it's FREE. You get a FREE computer sent to your home ( it's a loan ) , FREE workbooks and textbooks. If your child is old enough to independent study , it will be easier for you. If your child is young, you may have to work teaching your child reading and writing etc.
Remember you do have options:
http://www.k12.com/nvva/
or you can search for Connections Academy. Both schools are sponsored by the CCSD and are both FREE. No more excuses for your child failing school, no more blaming the teachers and administration. Sending your child to school so they will have a free breakfast or lunch is not the school's responsibility, it's yours. The school did not force you to have children you could not afford to bring into this world. Stop blaming society for your problem. You want to make a change...do the right thing by your child. Give them an education,& make them a useful member of society.
oh no, the home schooling weirdos
The simple fact is that the rest of us have had to suffer cuts, layoffs, part time instesd of full time, and have had to figure out a way to survive. My income for 2010 was about half of my income in each year from 2004-2008. We still make our mortgage payment every month and pay our other bills, on time. We have had to cut back on a lot of things we once did (no concert tickets, no Las Vegas trips last year, even went without A/C last summer), sold some assets, etc., but we are taking responsibility and NOT running out on any obligations. I know many in my profession with 30+ years of experience (including myself) who were laid off in late 2008 who have had to deal with the fact that work is not available like it once was, but we're living with it, and making do until things turn around.
While I know a lot of really great teachers (most from 2 income families, living in very nice neighborhoods by the way), they are not any "better" than the rest of us. No, they're not any worse either. We all have to make sacrafices (I've made mine!), now it's someone else's turn. Live with it. Even a 15% pay cut is a lot better than most of us have endured, and when a 5% pay cut was floated a week or so ago, you would have thought they were asking for 50% by the doomsday comments made. My favorite was from one who stated that they and their spouse were teachers (or state workers) so they would be getting a 10% cut. I think that one needs to try learninng some simple math! As the song goes..."Don't come crying to me...".
Speaking of simple math, this is all a Clark County taxpayer needs to know:
$2.1 billion / 300,000 students = $7,000 per pupil.
To put it another way, a classroom of 30 has to somehow scrape by on $210,000 per year. And yet we have bureaucrats saying this is not enough -- they need more.
I have nothing against teachers, administrators or anyone else involved in the education of our young people. It is not the duty of the citizens of this state to micromanage your broken education system, but like shareholders of a private company it is our duty to demand accountability and a positive return on our investment.
You say you need more money for education? The answer is "NO"!
Bad parenting is passed on to us by bad parents. So many folks have kids, but also have absolutely no concept of how to instill in their offspring the love of life, of learning and developing skills and talents that they never learned from their folks.
Add to this dilution of adultness in our society the culture of squandering that thrives in Vegas, and you know what we got???
The worst-endowed kids with the least capable folks in the realm of parenting, learning and developing skill and talent. I give you the truth.
And not paying a teacher who at best has a minimal impact on a kid's life is another 'Vegas' style cheap shot at what really ought to be - the community raising the little ones to become somebodies, not the nothings we have sentenced them to, by default, by intent, by under-funding, under-feeding, under-guiding and by the big one - ignorance of who they might become.
In 1961 Robert Heinlein published a strange book that used a new word - grok. He used grok so we could see how it fulfilled a need in our lexicon to identify the act of accepting by integrating, to include by identifying, to associate through understanding.
Fifty years ago some kid coined a word.
Today the value of that coined expression is better than gold because we need the notion of getting the picture, of seeing and knowing, of quiddity.
The tragedy of our schools is playing out, the scores are rolling in, and our kids do not grok. Their parents did not grok. Their lives have shrunk from not grokking this place. There is no joy in dumbville for mighty grokless has struck out.
Sad fact is that most of these kids will be flipping burgers or cleaning toilets once they graduate. Who will they have to thank for that...their parents! These parents do not care about their child's education. All they want to do is place blame on someone and ship their child that they made onto someone else to raise and teach. If you don't like what our education system is offering, you have options. Stop the complaining and whining. You call me a weirdo because I take responsibility for my child. You call me a weirdo because I love my child and want to see my child get the best education possible. You call me a weirdo because your jealous!
Several have suggested the people are willing to pay higher taxes to support schools.
I suggest we ask parents of students to voluntily support the school system. Parents would be asked to donate to the school that their student attends a monthly amount to cover the shortfall. I'm estimating this to be $30.00 per month per student.
This will get parents interested and invested in there kids education. The value of a quality education far exceeds the $30 cost.
Gee, another really cheap alternative would be the one that our previous occupier of the governor's mansion came up with after a long period sitting on the 'throne' - a handout for teachers.
Jimbo Gaboon came up with the idea of people donating some chump change for funding tomorrow's best and brightest. What a man!
Ain't it Fantastic how these hard times engender such an outpouring of kindness, of appreciation of our responsibilities as adults in a changing world??! 'Parents, give a dollar'; get a "quality education." LMFAO at those hapless korbel kids
It's pretty simple:
No one should be forced into financing ANY educational services, while those choosing to support the educational services of their choice should not be impeded from directly doing so.
Government has no right dictating choices as to what educational services an individual desires (if any) to fund or not fund.
: {
Actually Harley, your comments run contrary to the laws of the state of Nevada.
It seems a goofy thing for those who don't have kids in school, but the state does require that we all fund their education one way or another.
Sucks, huh? Change the consti-goddamn-tution if you'd like.
Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new Government laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.
: {