Join the conversation

Don't Forget the Rural Schools

Anthony,
I like all three of your suggestions and would just make one important addendum to the idea of urban residencies: rural residencies.

There are more rural school districts in America than urban ones. Poor rural districts, like those around me, are chronically short of teachers. Many of those who do come have a hard time making the adjustments to small towns, finding places to live, etc. Teaching in high-poverty rural areas has challenges, some similar to our urban colleagues, some unique. I envision rural residencies that are aimed primarily helping aspiring teachers not only complete their training, but help them set down roots in these communities (an important key to having a successful teaching career here).

Gut/repeal NCLB in accordance with the 10th Amendment to the Constitution and replace Standards Based Education with real thought provoking education. Teach students (not learners) to think and encourage them to attain knowledge to think with. Develop high quality text books at all grade levels for all academic deisiplines. Allow teachers to assess whether or not their students are learning the material that they have taught and grade them accordingly.

Reflecting on the recent worry over how we will get CEOs in the financial industry to work for a measly half-million a year (plus unlimited stock in their own corporations)-- A significant proportion of the money ought to go into investment in human capital. Hiring the best, then creating working conditions and ongoing professional growth and learning such that teaching becomes a highly creative and desirable career. This is very do-able--in fact, it is the norm in several other countries. Improving and stabilizing the teaching force ought to be Job #1. I also believe that money invested in improving school facilities is well-spent--for the strong message it sends to students and parents that their education is a priority. Two things I decidedly do NOT want to see the money spent on: #1) expensive data management systems that allow us to use value-added methodology and student test data to make policy and assessment decisions--just because the technology exists to do so, rather than for any clear-cut benefits. And I don't consider state to state comparisons at the granular level a benefit. #2) National standards

Anthony,

I wholeheartedly agree with your suggestions and also echo Nancy's concern about data management systems, which have become the be-all, end-all in many of our districts, even to the point of having a teaching position traded in at some high-needs schools for a position dedicated solely to data management. My urban district also experiences high teacher turnover, an intense focus on student achievement (euphemism for test scores), and planning times so structured that true collaboration isn't well-served.

From your mouths to Arne's ears . .

NCLB and teacher accountability are politically and at the same time pragmatically intertwined. What is missing from this paradigm is Educations’ feedback to the nation. I am a one of those teachers who, after twenty years in corporate America (computers), left to become a teacher. Accountability is the political cry and expectation of NCLB. Average Americans asks themselves, “Why should we 'expect' anything different of a Company employee group than would we of a school teacher group?” Every endeavor undertaken by every entity in America expects successful outcomes. Having worked in both environments, I suggest an answer has more to do with what these two groups do after arriving at their target, and subsequently how they communicate their successes, more than it does with the actual outcome.

We do a lousy job of advocating our successes to America. Its perception is that we are failing them and their children when it is not the case. I teach at a school that has 20 –30 percent improvements in every category in successive calendar years except in one sub group. The result: we are labeled an under performing school when we are far from that.

The education paradigm model is locked into specific budgetary requirements and timeframes. Students are expected to acquire “X” amount of knowledge, and prove it on a test within specified time frames of a unit, a semester, or a year. Students must demonstrate their skill(s) regardless of the varied skill levels at which each student entered the timeframe.

The Company model also has specific expectations. Standard expectations for a company group is to produce product “Y” within specific budgetary and calendar time frames. For the sake of this discussion, let us assume both groups had less than successful results.

At the end of their respective expectation blocks, both groups present their results.
Teachers assess student progress and report them. Teacher groups then keep the same product (their students) and move on to the next skill set. In the company model, they have a wider array of options. Was this a viable product? Can we push this product on, and tweak it or improve it. Can we use later models with revisions or upgrades? Can we toss this product and all our work, and chalk it up to R and D?

What the public sees and hears from both models is entirely different. Every year, GM, Ford, and Toyota put forth their respective product "Y" they hope will sell. The public rarely sees or hears failed company projects. Companies market successes and potential successes. They intentionally do not highlight, sell, or market products on which they spent significant development money, yet fell short of expectations. Education, on the other hand, moves forward with their student product as is…good or bad. They do not have the option of shelving an idea (student) or tossing it out. Education rarely has the option of asking for additional funding (or bailout) to retool. Education tries tweaking its product but it continues moving forward with rare exception. Oh, and it reports its failures and its successes for every single endeavor.

For all our efforts in education, the public generally hears how we fail to measure up. What they do not hear about is that in spite of student X or student Z entering our system with minimal reading, writing, or math skills he or she was able to progress and sometimes excel beyond their entry level this year! In spite of speaking English marginally particular students excelled at subject M. We need to improve our communication skills with the average American community.

Why is it every time there is a budget crunch the only salaries that get cut are teachers'? No one talks about cutting those of police officers, firemen, or any other public employees, only those of us entrusted with the education of the children of our society. Why are we so expendable, or so vulnerable to being hit so hard and so often? Why wonder that the best and the brightest think long and hard about becoming educators?

The profession is so challenging that it rivals any of those whose salaries are double or triple ours, yet the public perception is that we are replaceable, expendable, and that just anyone can do the job we do, just as well as we do, for whatever they are willing to pay. I began teaching for $6300 a year in 1971, and left to practice law because I couldn't begin to live on that salary. I came back to teaching because I love the job, but continue to sacrifice the life I would love to lead, that my attorney colleagues lead, because I was born to teach. Why must we make those difficult choices, and why aren't children important enough to government policy makers so that those of us who are committed to being the best teachers possible can be rewarded for our dedication in a way that fits that purpose?

I apologize for the rant, but it is discouraging to see young talented teachers leaving the profession because they can't support their families on the salaries they are being paid to teach, to see really good teachers leave because they want to send their kids to college and can't because they don't have the resources on a teacher's pay. It is disheartening to watch young teachers worry about losing their jobs because the legislature talks about funding cuts and pay cuts every year when they just want to pay their own bills and keep the job they have come to love, but may be surplussed like old furniture in a bad budget year.

Why are teachers so replaceable, so expendable, so cheap?
How about using some of those billions to save teachers?

Every time I read about teacher's salaries being cut, I can't but help remember the salaries of those in the upper levels of education in Fl where I used to teach. When do their salaries get reduced? How can they receive free vehicles and other bonuses when we are told there is not enough money to pay our salaries? In my current teaching situation some days I am required to work from 7:30 a.m. to 8 p.m. We don't receive overtime. We often take our work home with us, literally and figuratively. Yet, we are seen as expendable as has been mentioned. It is a shame and the reason that in five to ten years, I plan to teach at the college level instead.