My own education rant

[Calliope]

First of all, **applause** for you, Barb.  I enjoyed reading this post almost as
much as the PS Trilogy.  :)  You must be reading my mind - thank you for saying
what was right on the tip of my tongue (and doing it more eloquently than I
would have, in any case.)

Haggrid:  
> In the current situation with most school systems in the U.S.-- 
> Louisiana is not alone-- teachers have tenure, 

me:

Just so you know, in my state (SC) there is NO tenure.  There is NO teachers'
union.  We have no rights, no advocate for us, and we are at the mercy of the
administration and legislature.  We don't dare speak up for fear of retribution.


Barb said:
>>If some districts are in fact hiring 
unqualified people, it may be because it is hard to attract people 
to the area, which probably comes back to money again.  You need an 
adequate budget to attract qualified, motivated people, and if you 
skimp on that, frankly, you deserve what you get.

me:

Amen.  

Haggrid said:
> 2.  Abolish degrees in education.  Teachers should learn an 
> substantive body of knowledge and get a degree in a "real" , so 
> that they will understand their subject well enough to be creative 
> in communicating it in different ways to their pupils.

me:

That's where teachers like Snape come from.  (Yes, I know he's fictional but
just to use a teacher we all know.)  People who are absolute geniuses in their
field, brilliant people, but totally lacking in "people skills".  And trust me,
you need lots of people skills to get anything done in the classroom.  I had
many, many profs. like that in college, and they're very hard to learn from. 
However, I do feel that while getting my music education degree, I spent too
much time in the education building and not enough in the music building, and
because I had so many ed. classes to take, certain interesting musical electives
had to be given up. Plus, many of the education classes were "generic", lumping
music, English, science, etc. majors together, and the processes needed to teach
these subjects are *vastly* different. This is purely the fault of the
legislature, as they decide what the requirements are to be certified to teach,
and the universities arrange their curriculums accordingly.  

Barb said:
>>Even with people who have a degree and are pursuing certification, 
they are required (as they should be) to go through student teaching 
and evaluation, 

me: 

I totally agree. I would say that at least 40% of the skills and knowledge I use
on a day to day basis I acquired in the last four months of my college career,
when I did my internship (I was very fortunate to have an excellent mentor
teacher to work with.)  I shudder to think what my teaching would be like if I
had not been so fortunate as to work with a great teacher; some of my friends
had horrible internship experiences and were totally lost when they got their
first jobs, as college had not prepared us sufficiently (see above on too many
ed. classes and not enough subject classes.)

Barb:
and if they are not approved by their supervisor, 
even a perfect score on the certification exam will not make them  
teachers.  Some people should just not be in the classroom.  

me:

This is why I despise standardized tests with the passion of a thousand blazing
suns.  Tests do NOT prove what you are capable of doing.  They only prove that
you remembered useless facts long enough to regurgitate them onto a scan sheet.

Barb:
They were teaching their specialty and they were still dreadful, 
having no idea how to reach students, be fair, communicate their 
thoughts or hold discussions that didn't become name-calling 
matches.  I think those professors could have used some education 
courses, frankly.  Their brains contained a lot of knowledge, but it 
sure as hell didn't include how to TEACH.

me:
Again, that's where we get the Snape-like teachers from.

Haggrid:
> 3.  A corollary to #2 is to facilitate certification of 
> individuals who know their subjects, but do not have 
> an "education" degree by exam.  I mean an exam about the subject, 
> not about how to make posters as audio-visual aids.

me:

I take serious offense to this.  I never made a single poster in my ENTIRE
college career, and no one ever tested me on my ability to do so.  However, if
you don't know how to use visual aids properly, and think that a textbook and
worksheet is the only way to get your point across, you would not be a very
effective teacher.  My two knuts.

Haggrid:
> 4.  Retest teachers on their knowledge about the subjects they are 
> teaching periodically, with real sanctions if they do not pass.

me:
And who, precisely, is going to pay for this?  I can barely afford to take the
required classes for re-certification as it is, since our lovely government sees
fit to pay peanuts!  Do you have any idea how expensive testing is?  States
spend MILLIONS of dollars on standardized testing.  These testing companies are
making ridiculous amounts of money.  

Haggrid:
> 5.  Severely restrict the administrative structure that is soaking 
> up ever more of the education budgets of school systems.  
> Assistant principals, guidance counselors, janitors and even 
> schoolbus drivers partake of the same perquisites that we bestow 
> on teachers, and leave less of the education budget dollar to go 
> to those who actually teach.

Barb:
Excuse me, but who do you expect to clean the toilets, drive the 
buses and counsel the students?  

It is disingenuous to believe that only teachers 
are necessary to run a school district.  Support personnel keep 
things running smoothly.  

me:

Thank you, Barb.  If I had to clean the toilets and drive the buses on top of
everything else, I'd quit.  We have a hard enough time getting janitors and bus
drivers as it is.  I admire bus drivers - I have a temper like Ron Weasley's and
I would never be able to do it - I'd be fired.  Kids in a classroom and kids on
a bus are two totally different things.


Haggrid:
> 6.  Pay raises should be merit-based, not longevity-based.  

Barb:
As noted above, there should probably be some weight given to 
experience, but perhaps not as much as there is now.  Merit pay is a 
difficult thing to measure in districts where extreme poverty is a 
major factor in the challenges faced by both students and teachers.  
If anything, teachers in impoverished areas should probably be paid 
more than teachers elsewhere, as they have more hurdles to leap over 
on a day-to-day basis.

me:
And here is another problem:  not every subject is assesed on a standardized
test, nor should it be.  For goodness' sake, test administration takes up two
whole weeks of school as it is!  So what happens to the teachers whose subjects
are not tested like this?  Do we not get raises?  And if we are judged on some
other subjective criteria, there is too much room for retaliatory action (you
didn't do this the way I wanted, therefore you don't get a raise, because I said
so).

Another thing is some kids just plain don't CARE about the test, either because
they don't see the point (can't say I blame them), it's too confusing (I've seen
many standardized tests with errors, and they're not allowed to ask questions
for fear of cheating) or their parents just don't place an emphasis on school,
so they stayed up till three am the night before and fell asleep on top of their
test.  Is that the teachers' fault?  I think not.

Haggrid:
> 8.  Vouchers, vouchers, vouchers.  Unless there is a the ability 
> for parents to opt out of a failing education system completely, 
> and thereby deny it the funds allotted for that "seat", there will 
> be little incentive to take the vigorous measures that are 
> necessary, especially in light of #'s 1,5,&7 above.  Parochial 
> schools should be eligible to participate in this voucher system, 
> though no funds should go to support religious studies. (Yes, I 
> realize that money is fungible; so what?)

Barb:
I get so tired of people 
thinking vouchers are the be all end all solution for education.  
Vouchers would kill the public schools, pure and simple.  The fact 
is the public schools take the students no one else wants.  All 
private and parochial schools may choose their students.  They don't 
HAVE to take just anyone--and they don't (this doesn't even have 
anything to do with money).  

me:  
Yes, this is something that no one seems to realize.  We teach all the kids who
come through our doors, no matter where they come from, what their attitude is,
or whether or not they want to be there.  I'm sure a school who is filled with
students who want to learn, whose parents want them to be there and care about
their schooling, and who know that they can and will be kicked out if they don't
toe the line, will do well on a standardized test.  And then guess who is stuck
(for lack of a better word) with the rest?  You got it.

Then when the students who ran away from the system grow up and have to
live/work in a society with the people who were left behind because their
parents either didn't care, or cared enough to try to stick it out - then what
happens?  I don't think I want to know.

Running away from problems doesn't fix them.

Calliope

"The Last Time" Chapter 21 is up! 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Calliopes_fics/
See also:
http://www.thedarkarts.org/authorLinks/Calliope/
http://www.riddikulus.org/authorLinks/Calliope/