IGX

Turdacious wrote:http://www.nber.org/books/levi09-1
Summary: There's no conclusive evidence that raising teacher salaries, focusing on test scores, or reducing class sizes improves student performance. Market based school choice (i.e. giving parents a choice) and improved teacher selection criteria do. (if anyone's interested, PM me and I can send you the article. It is written by economists, and may not be that accessible to those out of practice with economistspeak.) EXSUM-- Pinky is right.

http://www.mdrc.org/publications/614/overview.html
Summary: Re NYC's results from Small Public Schools of Choice results-- they do better than normal public high schools. Gives links to other related briefs (this one is probably more in line with what you're looking for BD).

Gary John wrote:

The dismissal of teacher preparation programs by the liberal arts faculty on many campuses was so complete that in the 1930s the president of Harvard described Harvard's Graduate School of Education as a "kitten that ought to be drowned."

Folks with degrees in education score the lowest in testing for math, literature and science of all degrees.

A teacher one standard deviation above the mean effectiveness annually generates marginal gains of over $400,000 in present value of student future earnings with a class size of 20 and proportionately higher with larger class sizes. Alternatively, replacing the bottom 5-8 percent of teachers with average teachers could move the U.S. near the top of international math and science rankings with a present value of $100 trillion.

Blaidd Drwg wrote:As a parent I agree with Jack reflexively but the statistics seem to indicate better teaching makes a world of difference. Removing a tumor may not leave the patient cancer free. It is a simple thing you can do that makes a big difference even if it does not cure all that ails the patient.

The second thing is...the last thing this country needs is another ideological culture war over why thing A or B sucks. Abortion, the drug war, the religious freedom in schools all of these semi useless sidetracks are now permanent fixtures in our political and cultural dialogue. They will not ever be resolved until we collectively forget what we were arguing about. It's not that they are not important issues but the war is not winnable...We'd do much better as a country if we focused on good solutions instead of perfect ones.

BRANDX University's Bachelor of Science in Secondary Education with an Emphasis in Math program is designed for those who wish to teach math in grades 7-12. The program's required math courses offer instruction in college algebra, trigonometry, analytic geometry, and calculus. A math-specific course in teaching methods is also included. Other teaching courses that are applicable no matter what course a secondary instructor teaches include secondary methods, educational psychology, cultural diversity, English as a second language, and the exceptional learner. The program culminated with full-time student teaching experience. Graduates are eligible for Institutional Recommendation, which may help them obtain their teacher's license.

powerlifter54 wrote:
Great teachers would help. But a College kid who graduates with a degree in Biology or Math or English has zero chance of getting a teaching job at anything other than a private school...which does a better job educating kids in general because of both better content mastery by teachers and better support at home.

How much math does an Education Major need to get a degree?

powerlifter54 wrote:i have no time for Teacher's Unions, but the problem is parents/Culture/support mechanisms.

You could have Stephen Hawking teaching in the hood, and because of the culture surrounding those kids and the shitty home life and study discipline/motivations, they wouldn't thrive. The opposite is true in Asian homes and culture.

Gross oversimplification but doesn't make it less true.

Bottom line is that problem is not throwing enough money at schools. The cycle of communities who don't care about their kids actually knowing and displaying knowledge (to maybe get a job?), led and taught by folks who come out of that culture, and supported from outside by folks who "owe" them.

Welcome to the Jungle baby.

Turdacious wrote:

powerlifter54 wrote:i have no time for Teacher's Unions, but the problem is parents/Culture/support mechanisms.

You could have Stephen Hawking teaching in the hood, and because of the culture surrounding those kids and the shitty home life and study discipline/motivations, they wouldn't thrive. The opposite is true in Asian homes and culture.

Gross oversimplification but doesn't make it less true.

Bottom line is that problem is not throwing enough money at schools. The cycle of communities who don't care about their kids actually knowing and displaying knowledge (to maybe get a job?), led and taught by folks who come out of that culture, and supported from outside by folks who "owe" them.

Welcome to the Jungle baby.

That's as much of a gross oversimplification as the union argument. Poor communities have never had the ability to educate their kids in public schools to the same level as wealthier ones. This was well known decades ago.

As teachers’ salaries face national scrutiny and calls for pay tied to student performance, a Chicago Sun-Times analysis of educator earnings, based on total compensation last school year, found that public school teachers who make at least $100,000 like those in District 113 are the exception rather than the rule in Illinois.

Statewide, 11.25 percent of high school teachers and 2.26 percent of elementary-grade teachers hit that mark. Statewide, the average elementary teacher made $61,140 — including all benefits, summer school pay, after-school stipends and retirement payouts. The average high school teacher took home $69,366.

In Chicago, where the typical teacher stands at the head of a classroom comprised of 87 percent low-income kids, a six-figure pulldown was rarer still. Just over 1 percent of Chicago public elementary and high school teachers hit that mark.

The most competitive compensation in Chicago was earned by elementary principals, whose average pay of $141,695 ranked No. 8 statewide.

However, Chicago Principals Association President Clarice Berry noted that Chicago principals’ pay is tied to the number of students in their buildings. Some CPS elementary schools serve over 1,000 kids. Some are so overcrowded, Berry said, students attend classes in staggered shifts.

“If you have an elementary school with a couple thousand kids, you’ll be on the same level as a high school principal,’ Berry said. ‘‘That pushes elementary principals up there in the range of high school principals.”

Blaidd Drwg wrote:The local Police Unions are neck and neck with the NEA for intellectual and actual corruption. I'd like to see both of them collapse. and for the record, I'm not anti-union at all. i think there are many that serve an incredibly valuable function but both of the two I mentioned have gone way beyond protecting the rights of workers on the job.

All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public personnel management. The very nature and purposes of government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with government employee organizations. The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives in Congress. Accordingly, administrative officials and employees alike are governed and guided, and in many instances restricted, by laws which establish policies, procedures, or rules in personnel matters. Particularly, I want to emphasize my conviction that militant tactics have no place in the functions of any organization of government employees. Upon employees in the Federal service rests the obligation to serve the whole people, whose interests and welfare require orderliness and continuity in the conduct of government activities. This obligation is paramount. Since their own services have to do with the functioning of the Government, a strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent on their part to prevent or obstruct the operations of Government until their demands are satisfied. Such action, looking toward the paralysis of Government by those who have sworn to support it, is unthinkable and intolerable