Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!nbires!hao!hplabs!sdcrdcf!ism780c!geoff From: geoff@ism780c.UUCP (Geoff Kimbrough) Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,net.kids Subject: Re: Taxing Schools Etc. (paranoid educational establishment) Message-ID: <3526@ism780c.UUCP> Date: Wed, 10-Sep-86 14:27:58 EDT Article-I.D.: ism780c.3526 Posted: Wed Sep 10 14:27:58 1986 Date-Received: Fri, 12-Sep-86 07:03:55 EDT References: <3107@umcp-cs.UUCP> <2655@burdvax.UUCP> Reply-To: geoff@ism780c.UUCP (Geoff Kimbrough) Organization: Interactive Systems Corp., Santa Monica, CA Lines: 89 Summary: Teachers work for the students, not their parents Xref: mnetor talk.politics.misc:52 net.kids:2781 In article <2655@burdvax.UUCP> devonst@burdvax.UUCP (Tom Albrecht) writes: >janw@inmet.UUCP writes: >>I agree with your priorities, which makes me reject your position. >>Since early 60's, as government kept throwing more and more More money in what sense? As a % of government expenditures? Adjusted for inflation? Per capita? Per student? >>money at public schools, the education level was steadily >>going down. That system does not work. Correlation implies causality? Are you trying to tell us that there have been *no* other relevent changes in our society since the 60's? What about the changes in demographics? What about TV? What about the changes in the structure and stability of the family? What about the increase in mobility (people moving the household more often)? More money is not the whole solution, agreed, but how is less money going to solve anything? >Secretary of Education Bennett relates the story of a school system in the >midwest that set up a sort of magnet school specializing in the humanities. >The educational possibilities were so superior to other schools in the same >system that four times as many students applied as there were >openings in the school. So what did the benighted school officials do? I suspect they would have been delighted to open up 4 more magnet schools, but lacked the funds. >Did they open another school or two in order to accommodate the demand for >quality education? No, they shut down the new school because they said it >was "unworkable". This sort of story only points out the utter failure of >public education. Proof by anecdote? Well, magnet school programs all over the country have been tremendously successful. One of the problems they face is the perceived "brain-drain" which may hurt the schools as a whole. The only solution I can see to that is to make ALL of the schools magnet schools. But that would take lots of money. Personally, I think it would be worth it. > In New Jersey, Governor Kean has >said that a degree from a teacher's college is no longer needed to teach in >the state. All one needs to show is a proficiency in the subject area and >an ability to communicate with young people and you can teach in NJ >schools. Someone is finally moving to break the death grip that the >educational establishment has on the public schools. It sounds to me like Gov Kean is just lowering standards to attract more teachers, instead of raising salaries or improving working conditions. >95% of Americans support the concept of merit pay and teacher competency >tests. Americans believe that good teachers should be paid more money and >that bad teachers should be fired to make room for better teachers. >Teachers unions, on the other hand, want more money but are unwilling to >submit themselves to any review process linked to salary increases. (Where are you getting this information?) The teachers I've talked to want to get rid of the bad eggs too, but there's a lot of disagreement about how to identify them. As in all fields, the bad eggs are often very politically adept. It's not a simple problem. In LA schools, raises are linked to continued training, the teachers have to go to school themselves if they want to get their raises. >Teachers say they want to be treated like professionals, but are unwilling >to accept the same sort of qualification process that other professionals Doesn't this contradict what you said earlier? Which way do you want it? Teachers currently have certification procedures, but you said you approve of eliminating them. >have. Would you want a doctor who refused to take medical board exams and be >licensed by the state medical association to operate on your 9 year old >child? Would you go to a lawyer who didn't take the Bar exam? How many doctors and lawyers would there be if the average salary after 20 years in the field was less than $30,000? (not enough) How good would they be? (probably Damn good, they'd have to be pretty committed to keep working for peanuts, at least until they burned out.) How effective would they be if they were denied support staff and modern equipment? (answer left as an exercise for the student) > Teachers and school administrators better get it through their >heads that they work for the parents and not for themselves nor the >teacher's unions. No they don't! They work for the students. One of the problems teachers are facing is that they're being expected to raise other people's children for them. Teachers are spending too much of their precious time dealing with discipline problems which aren't being dealt with at home. They get blamed for the illiteracy of students who've never attended classes. Did you know that in Los Angeles, an elementary school teacher is not *allowed* to fail a student without parental permission? Guess how often they get it. >Tom Albrecht Someone pointed out that a less generic educational system is needed to produce the kind of specialized talents required in our current society. I agree. I hope no one is naive enough to think that it won't cost big bucks. TANSTAAFL. Of course it takes more than just money, lots more. Geoffrey Kimbrough -- Director of Dangerous Activities INTERACTIVE Systems Corporation, Santa Monica California ihnp4!ima!geoff || sdcrdcf!ism780c!geoff || ucla-cs!ism780!geoff When I die I'm leaving my body to Science Fiction.