Posts
Rising income inequality could undo "the cultural ties that bind our society" and even lead to "large-scale violence." The remedy, he says, is not higher taxes on the rich but improved education, which can be helped by paying math teachers more.I do not disagree. It’s part of the solution, along with other education and government reforms. I wonder what Greenspan thinks of school choice? That’s a sure way to bring math teachers’ salaries closer to market level.
Also, I think this is somewhat unfortunate, but true.
From serving under so many presidents, Mr. Greenspan concludes that there's something abnormal about anyone willing to do what it takes to get the job. Mr. Ford, he writes, "was as close to normal as you get in a president, but he was never elected."
Greenspan Book Criticizes Bush And Republicans
update: from Catherine
Diving into Tex's post, this passage from the Greenspan article caught my attention:
In coming years, as the globalization process winds down, he predicts inflation will become harder to contain. Recent increases in the price of imports from China and a rise in long-term interest rates suggest "the turn may be upon us sooner rather than later."
I'm old enough to be continually astonished at how well Americans live these days. The sheer amount of stuff Americans of modest means own is incredible compared to what I had as a child and a young adult.
I don't understand economics, but I gather the "gadget bounty" we enjoy is due to our ability to buy inexpensive consumer goods from Asia. (pls correct me -- )
Ed says that, historically, rising inequality is a bad thing.
Of course, I think it's correct to say that Americans have a high tolerance for income inequality. I know I do, and I'm speaking of my many days living on the relative have-not side of things.* But if history is a guide, and I presume that history is a guide, there are limits.
I guess what I'm saying is, if DVRs and flat-screen TVs and Blackberries start costing an arm and a leg -- as such things used to do -- we may hit that limit sooner rather than later.
* I still live on the relative have-not side of things here in Irvington....for pretty much my entire adult life I've lived in communities filled with people far wealthier than I.
18 comments:
I think we should pay ALL teachers more, not just math teachers. But also I don't think that alone will solve any problems. Teachers in many areas get well over $40,000 a year, and yet it hasn't impacted student achievement. Compare that to other college graduates getting paid $7 a hour who can't afford health care or anything.
Here in Chicago, teachers with several years of service and easily gotten lane credits past a Master's reach the $70,000 mark and beyond.
http://www.cps-humanresources.org/Employee/Forms/SalAdm/TSCHA-01_06.pdf
Yes, school vouchers. In the long run, I think those will benefit the lower-income students more.
The other thing is that parents should really set up their own schools, with outside help of course.
Do homeschooling families get discounts on taxes?
I suppose not.
THANKS FOR POSTING!
(It was on my to-do list.)
I can certainly attest to the fact that high salaries for teachers don't automatically result in good teaching.
Our teachers earn 6-figure salaries (not sure at what stage they reach this figure).
The last time I spoke to the math chair she was wearing a mink coat and large pearls.
Christian says the school parking lot looks like a Lexus dealership. He was joking (he's incredibly witty).
Nonetheless, the joke tells you how a young black person from Yonkers sees our teachers & their income.
Our middle school math program is a disaster. I don't know what's going on at the high school level, though the high school calculus teacher is the department chair. (She's the one wearing the furs and pearls.)
I think the teachers there are probably pretty good, but by the time kids get there they're far behind their peers in Europe and Asia, etc., etc.
No need to belabor this.
I'll belabor it later.
The other thing is that parents should really set up their own schools, with outside help of course.
I think that's going to have to happen.
ALTHOUGH I've seen parents set up their own schools (in autism) and....it is TOUGH.
I think parents, rather than setting up their own schools, need to set up their own....
hmm...
I don't know what to call it, but I know it's already being done.
Parents need to have lists of teachers "on call" (that's not exactly right) who can teach particular classes.
For instance, in Riverdale there is apparently a terrific physics teacher who works independently.
You sign your student up for his class and you pay him to teach.
There is a calculus teacher who works independently in the Philadelphia suburbs.
etc.
Ben Calvin once said to me that my thoughts about what I wanted our school to do resembled a community college.
I think some kind of community college model for homeschoolers may be a place to start.
You might very well want departments, a faculty who can mentor and teach each other, etc....but you don't have "captive" students AND you don't have captive faculty.
(And yes, I do know that the question of educating kids with serious emotional problems & disabilities is more difficult.)
I'm STRONGLY in favor of homeschooling parents getting a deduction on taxes.
Their kids, as a group, are far ahead of public school kids; they're doing us a favor.
When I read the Greenspan article I thought, "So it's up to homeschoolers to save America from certain doom."
(Can't remember what line in the article sparked that thought...)
I would add afterschoolers to that list as well. How much are you paying to undo the damage? How much time are you spending plugging holes? I've lost track. Actually, I think I'm afraid to keep track.
I think we should pay ALL teachers more, not just math teachers.
I disagree with this, because some (many, most?) teachers are fairly compensated for what they bring to the table. (Not that I’m speaking from any knowledge base except anecdotal information.)
I was reading recently (cannot remember WHERE!) about how teachers often adopt a socialist mentality. A teacher will want similar wages, benefits, treatment for ALL teachers because that’s the only way she can advocate for herself. In addition to feeling wrong to me, this promotes inflationary school spending and resistance from taxpayers.
Some teaching skills and subjects have a higher market value than others do, I think.
"I disagree with this, because some (many, most?) teachers are fairly compensated for what they bring to the table."
Do you mean in terms of skill level, or is this a reflection of what you say later, that "Some teaching skills and subjects have a higher market value than others do." I'd be interested to see some elaboration on this from you (or others). In your opinion, which ones, and why? (Math worth more than English, core curriculum worth more than fine arts, etc.?)
I don't think simply paying people more is the answer either, and a blanket, equal wage even less so. I think there are other accomodations that could be made to improve teaching and attract better teachers. For instance, capping class sizes at 15-17 (somewhere, an administrator is laughing hysterically). My smallest class right now is 30 kids, my largest 33, and I don't have enough desks for them all, and these numbers (rotated in 90 minute shifts with only 7 minutes between them) are EXHAUSTING. Class sizes this large are a huge deterrent to me being able to give an adequate amount of my time and attention to kids in class, and to their work outside of class, especially when it comes time for research papers and etc.
Other ideas: useful professional development in my subject area; more department time for the development of truly effective lessons; working a/c in my classroom during the hot months in Texas; more time to observe master teachers in action; even things as petty as a small classroom budget (say, $100 a year?) to purchase books for my reading shelf.
It's not so much the pay, in my opinion. Sometimes it's often the conditions, or the fear of the conditions, that keep potentially great educators out of the profession.
It's not so much the pay, in my opinion. Sometimes it's often the conditions, or the fear of the conditions, that keep potentially great educators out of the profession.
As I understand it, there's a pretty solid body of research showing that this is the case -- it's the conditions, not the pay.
I think Greenspan's point about paying math & science teachers more probably takes this into account.
I would add afterschoolers to that list as well. How much are you paying to undo the damage? How much time are you spending plugging holes? I've lost track. Actually, I think I'm afraid to keep track.
I wish to heck I had kept track.
I've definitely into the thousands on books & materials.
The financial issue for me, of course, is opportunity costs.
I've taken a huge amount of time off from paying work in order to remediate the school.
Did I post the link from "pissed off teacher" yet???
jeez, I don't think I did
Her comments on what would happen with merit pay in NYC are horrifying.
Catherine: And think about how much of your tax money goes into buying entire libraries of 90 dollars-each fuzzy math textbooks!
And think about how much of your tax money goes into buying entire libraries of 90 dollars-each fuzzy math textbooks!
This has not escaped my notice.
The Glencoe book isn't particularly fuzzy, but it's wildly overloaded with distracting color and gizmosity.
It's the textbook equivalent of a 600-dollar toilet seat.
Would Greenspan favor school choice? I don't know for sure, but my guess would be yes: he was a protege and friend of Ayn Rand, a total free-market advocate. In fact, I would imagine that she would have preferred to do away with public schooling altogether, but I doubt Greenspan would go as far.
"I disagree with this, because some (many, most?) teachers are fairly compensated for what they bring to the table."
Do you mean in terms of skill level, or is this a reflection of what you say later, that "Some teaching skills and subjects have a higher market value than others do." I'd be interested to see some elaboration on this from you (or others)
I think that probably most teachers, based on their qualifications, job responsibilities and work performance are fairly compensated. I view salaries through the prism of market value. For instance, when I hear about math teachers being in short supply and I learn that math teachers are paid the same as art teachers, then I think it makes sense to increase math teacher compensation so that qualified candidates will be wooed away from other jobs to teaching. Also, merit pay based on some performance criteria seems reasonable.
A big issue that comes up during budget time in our school district is the cost of teacher benefits. Teacher pension and health benefits are more generous than those for private sector employees.
Working conditions do keep coming up as a component of teacher satisfaction. Even in a wealthy suburban district like mine, I hear stories of teachers with no place to call home who must carry their stuff around with them, of inadequate phone and computer access, and other problems.
Poor working conditions and inadequate compensation, I guess, are problems encountered by many other types of employees, not just teachers. I view unions and government bureaucracy as impediments to alleviating these problems in schools. School choice as a solution looks very attractive to me.
Greenspan sounds like he's making a political statement. Salary is only one component of compensation. Public school teachers here in NY seem well compensated to me: http://www.myshortpencil.com/teachersalaries.htm. I believe that the charts there don't include all the additional little jobs a teacher can add thru the district (team leader, department chair, coach, teaching night high school, tutoring those that fail state testing, sponsor of a club, grading state tests etc) to boost the salary component. There's also the benefit of being able to take long leaves of absences and actually keep one's job....how many have this in private industry?? And how about the perk of bringing the kids to work for an hour or two daily instead of arranging supervised daycare? Perhaps if more salary is needed, the union can negotiate some trade-offs with retirement or medical benefits. Or if housing cost is the issue, perhaps some help can be arranged.
>>For instance, in Riverdale there is apparently a terrific physics teacher who works independently.
You sign your student up for his class and you pay him to teach.
Does the district award credit?
I am looking for a district that has set a precedent by awarding credit from an accredited distance learning option in lieu of it's own theoretically identical course or for a course it is unable to offer that other area high schools do (say for ex. AP Calc BC). So far as I can tell, my district only awards credit from institutes it has joint agreements with (local CC, Marist), but I'd like to be able to have my kids take a few other things.
Post a Comment