Since MPP kicked me off, commenting over there has been pretty limited. Which makes sense since the site reminds me of a bunch of parrots repeating each other's words. However occasionally someone does have an original thought and some discussion occurs. (ie Lynnell) Of course the response is often the usual bashing and name calling...
MPP How I Got Over (Lynnell)
MPP People have seen enough Reform (Dan)
I really like Lynnell's thoughts on this topic... Thoughts?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
19 comments:
Sounds like Lynell has had a strong dose of reality and found it conflicts with his liberal worldview. Of course, he has plenty left to fall back on, like the liberal belief that government can cure poverty or that more money makes better schools, and that the only reason liberalism fails is because Republicans stand in the way, rather than that liberal ideas fail whenever and wherever they're tried.
I suppose if we were smart we would ask him to join us Republicans in implementing merit pay and retention, in increasing charter school options and school choice, and in spending all that "diversity" money on something that actually MATTERS. If Democrats were smart, ... oh, never mind.
I am thinking that Dan, Grace, Big E, Dog Gone, etc will only be happy if we fully embrace Socialism... The idea that people and families should be rewarded for making the right decisions, "living conservatively", working hard, etc seems to elude them.
Daily Kos 75 Ways Socialsim has Improved America
DSA
It's time for Rush Trees again...
Liberals "feel" that it isn't "fair" that some succeed and some do not. The reality that some work harder than others, or that some start with and use their natural advantages, is something they, with their moral and intellectual superiority, are obligated to "fix." "From each according to their ability, to each according to their needs." Sound familiar?
I am always amazed though that they consistently seem to want to put the adult teacher's wants/needs ahead of those of the children/students.
They seem to have no problem with keeping questionable teachers in the classroom, no matter how many unfortunate students become delayed by being forced to interact with that poor teacher.
And then they have the nerve to bash the Gates foundation... Probably by far the most philanthropic organization of our time. Especially after Buffett threw his support behind it.
Sorry, but you are expecting liberals to face reality, and that never happens. They put teachers first because unions are the right way for people to live-- rather like communes-- and what they actually produce does not matter. Besides, the union says the right things and its intentions are good, so the results must be good. End of story for them. Have you noticed that once liberals pass a piece of legislation to address some "crisis" they immediately lose all interest in the subject, not even caring what is actually IN the legislation or what its real-world effect will be? You know, like presuming that keeping sane and rational people from buying ugly guns will stop crazy people from killing children?
No, let's give Lynell some credit, here. He sees the reality and even admits that the fixes are relatively straightforward, and he's right about them. He just can't admit that he's on the GOP side of the debate. And his fellow liberals will surely ostracize him, regardless. One must never let reality intrude on liberal fantasy.
Oh, and before anybody else chimes in, I think most teachers ARE trying to do the best they can for the children; they are good people doing good work. Unfortunately, many could do better except for the union system, some aren't as well qualified as they should be, and a few ought to have been fired long ago.
FYI. If I remember correctly, Lynnell is a woman.
Women are more likely to be liberals, so if true, all the more credit for facing reality. Even more importantly, gender does not matter to the "facts of the case." I find myself often arguing to a liberal, "OK, so I'm a conservative, but that does not make me wrong." Liberals think that who speaks matters more than the truth spoken.
Reign-of-Error-by-Diane-Ravitch
Education reform is a complicated issue and D. Ravitch makes some fair criticisms of the billionaire reformers. I am on the library request list for her latest book
I am thinking she is a bit one sided...
"It does nothing to address the realities of poverty and inequality, "the root causes of poor academic performance." And it has put public education, "an essential institution," responsible for producing a democratic citizenry and providing equality of opportunity, at risk."
Even we could come up with more factors poverty and inequality... G2A Factors
I think Lynell knows more about this than D. Ravitch. And he has the facts on his side. The FACT is that government has been trying to eradicate poverty for 50 years and it's worse now than it was then, even though it isn't their job in the first place. They DO have the responsibility to educate the public but have failed to do so, in large measure because they keep insisting on the public-school union model and on spending 3 times as much for the same result, in real terms, as we did 40 years ago. THAT is failure in the extreme and that is where you start-- with the factors that you control.
If "education reform is a complex issue" then there is all the more reason to get government out of it and let private sector competition sort out best practices. Remember Obama admitting that "health insurance is complicated" when it was finally obvious that Obamacare's one-size-fits-all pipe dream was coming apart like a dime watch? Public education would be "fixed" tomorrow if government would simply redefine it to "education of the public" and hand over the money to every parent and require it go to education, whether public, private, parochial, charter, home or online. Sure, build in some checks if you like, but the transition is built into this scheme of "universal vouchers."
Ravitch is one sided and I don't agree with all her views, nor do I agree with all of the reform agenda. Some reform ideas are good, some not so much. Here is one teacher's views that I mostly agree with.
An Open Letter to Mayor RT Rybak from an MPS Teacher
I think one major idea of reformers that I mostly disagree with is merit pay based on test scores. I agree with the teacher blogger that starting pay should be higher.
I agree with your teacher, and enthusiastically endorse all her ideas in spirit. But I think merit pay has to be part of it-- rewarding advancement and innovation-- and I think there needs to be a career path for teachers that doesn't require "promoting" your best teachers into poor administrators, something like apprentice-journeyman-master with pay to match. That also gets your innovation, best practices and teacher development ideas working.
And while I agree that we should get rid of all that "diversity" nonsense, we shouldn't be continuing it under the guise of "cultural competence." That's racist. Period. Kids are different in what they know when they come to school, in what their work/study habits are, and maybe even in "learning style." (I'm learning some of my students are tactile learners, for example.) Teachers should concern themselves with how to reach kids with those different learning styles and abilities, and forget completely what color they are, except as a matter of being able to call them by name! You know, like an individual!
And test scores must certainly be a part of merit pay. We decide whether kids are learning by their test scores, and establish the size of the "gap" by test scores, and so the test score (difference over the year) produced by a single teacher is the single most important factor in assessing teacher quality, which I hope we all agree is the number one factor in education. Of course, I would temper that until we get to the point, with the other reforms, where the teacher has an ability to actually control the amount of learning in her class. Union rules, state mandates, discipline problems, etc. all hamstring otherwise good teachers and prevent better teaching.
Laurie,
So would you be willing to raise the starting pay for Teachers by lowering the upper range?
Remember my view that Teachers are one of the few jobs that I can think of where an employees can double their compensation while doing the exact same job. (ie one classroom of kids per teaching period)
I would not lower pay at the upper range, as it is relatively low for someone with an advanced degree. I would try to make other career pathways for the best teachers to assume training/leadership roles for greater pay. In big districts I would have fewer people in administration in the central office.
I am fine with paying people more if they have more responsibility, results and accountability, currently that is not the case for Teachers in the Public School system.
They are paid more just because of degrees and/or years served, which of course makes no sense as I have explained before.
The challenge with the real world is that fewer people are required in the upper portion of the org chart. (ie triangle) So most people who just want to be Teachers should be making probably within 30% of each other. And then a smaller minority would be making more.
Whereas currently the Teacher pay scale looks like a rectangle since many people move up the arbitrary (ie not performance or responsibility based) pay scale. Meaning we are likely over paying many many Teachers.
Would you pay more for someone with degrees, even though it does not make them anymore productive or successful? Today we likely do in many cases.
We need to do what smart companies started doing long ago-- creating a career path for professionals that keeps them in the profession and does not give up a good engineer to get a poor engineering manager. They are not the same skill set, and the same is true with the "profession" of teaching-- the best teachers may be lousy managers, and vice versa. I put quotes around the word "profession" because right now teachers are NOT professionals. They aren't paid like it, or treated like it, because they are union drones-- one just like the other.
That's why Pawlenty's merit pay plan was so brilliant. He wanted that career path-- apprentice-journeyman-master teacher-- so that the best teachers would get paid more, sure, but also so that they would develop the younger teachers (added responsibility) and spread their best practices. That reduces the amount of administrative overhead in the school, too. Of course, the unions want absolutely nothing to do with merit pay of any kind, or advancement based on anything except seniority, so here we are.
(Did you notice that a number of school districts in Wisconsin have de-certified their unions since the Walker reforms have passed?) Sounds like a start to treating teachers as professionals, to me.
Post a Comment