America's Education System Is Fine

[Zelig]

The main problem these days is that schools are more into protecting a Kid's ego and confidence than actually teaching him the harsh realities of life.

My life doesn't have harsh realities.

 

[Agent 1337]

My life doesn't have harsh realities.

 

[Truronian]

Yeah, Bill Gates has recently come out in favor of this, saying that classes with ~40 kids, so long as the teacher is exceptional, would be good policy. I'm pretty sure Gates would never send his kid to a middle school with a 40:1 student/teacher ratio.

40 kids? That teacher would have to be exceptionally exceptional.

 

[downtown]

All pupils are inclined to learn to varying degrees. Good teachers, good resources and ample support staff all help to ensure that the majority of pupils are putting in effort and progressing in class. Teaching assistants in particular are critical when dealing with pupils who are disruptive and easily disrupted, both common traits amongst pupils in poor areas.

I'm actually starting to think that this is where we can cut a lot of our education spending, and use the savings to invest in teachers, specifically (more of them, and better train them). The requirements for support staff are pretty low in the US...paraprofessionals are associates degree positions, and you can substitute teach in some states without a college degree.

Support staff spending has exploded, in part because Federal Regulations demand it, but I'm not sure a lot of them actually help that much.

 

[Ajidica]

Support staff spending has exploded, in part because Federal Regulations demand it, but I'm not sure a lot of them actually help that much.

I can offer my experiances that paraprofessionals help teachers alot in classes beyond simply dealing with the dispruptive student.

 

[Hygro]

I've read all these arguments in this thread now, and am surprised no one made this (probably because it's too-) obvious point:

Just because you got through school fine doesn't mean you learned enough.

 

[downtown]

I can offer my experiances that paraprofessionals help teachers alot in classes beyond simply dealing with the dispruptive student.

hows that?

 

[BasketCase]

Start paying teachers 60-70k a year (possibly not to that until a couple years out of school and proven they can actually teach, and/or with master's degree + certification requirements) and you'd see the change in the pool of available teachers.

Lots of people posted stuff equivalent to the above. Nothing personal.

What we need to be doing, rather than pay teachers 60-70k a year, is pay good teachers 60-70k a year. That's the problem. I'm not completely up to snuff on teachers' unions, but in general, bad teachers aren't fire-able. Higher pay only produces better teachers if the incentive is there; if you get paid highly no matter what, you become a slacker.

 

[ParadigmShifter]

I thought you knew more than your teachers at primary school?

 

[Flying Pig]

I thought you knew more than your teachers at primary school?

When I used to work at a school, I occasionally had cause to go into the headmaster's office. On his wall there was a poster saying 'Teenagers: leave home, get a job and start your life NOW, while you still know everything'

 

[ParadigmShifter]

True. BasketCase doesn't seem to have worked out that intelligent people should join the union to maximise their personal gain. I guess he's some sort of communist.

 

[Jolly Rogerer]

I feel I ought to point out that England hasn't been a country since the 18th century.

And they haven't had a good World Cup team since before that.

 

[Flying Pig]

I feel I ought to point out that England hasn't been a country since the 18th century.

Yes we bloody well have. We haven't been an Independant Sovereign State (I think that's the right word) since then; we're still very much a country thank you very much. Don't lump the taffs, jocks and micks in with us!

And they haven't had a good World Cup team since before that.

If we ignore 2003 of course.

 

[Jolly Rogerer]

And why are they dumb and lazy?

Because they are fat. At least they are jolly though.

I can offer my experiances that paraprofessionals help teachers alot in classes beyond simply dealing with the dispruptive student.

Yea, those paras have a reputation for being tough, and a lot of them are probably combat vets these days.

American schools are run by states for the most part, with some federal regulation. Also, OP is wrong and a joke.

Nope. In most cases public schools are run by local government with some state regulation. Federal regulation is very limited in terms of actual education issues, mainly being social engineering and welfare oriented.

 

[Flying Pig]

Yea, those paras have a reputation for being tough, and a lot of them are probably combat vets these days.

There is a scheme called 'troops to teachers' over here that gets decidedly mixed reviews from those I know who have done it - some hate it because your army experience counts for nothing and you're being treated like a complete rookie again, and others love it because you're adapting to a new job rather than relying on your previous army experience. Marmite, I guess.

 

[downtown]

What we need to be doing, rather than pay teachers 60-70k a year, is pay good teachers 60-70k a year. That's the problem. I'm not completely up to snuff on teachers' unions, but in general, bad teachers aren't fire-able. Higher pay only produces better teachers if the incentive is there; if you get paid highly no matter what, you become a slacker.

How do we determine who is a good teacher?

 

[Jolly Rogerer]

There is a scheme called 'troops to teachers' over here that gets decidedly mixed reviews from those I know who have done it - some hate it because your army experience counts for nothing and you're being treated like a complete rookie again, and others love it because you're adapting to a new job rather than relying on your previous army experience. Marmite, I guess.

As someone who has experienced education at a lot of levels here in the U.S., I was surprised to find that military instruction was the most effective by far. While vets tend to be experienced teachers and also tend not to have as much of a problem getting and holding the attention of a class, in my opinion the effectiveness of service training was largely for other reasons.

Most of the time it consisted of a short lesson, some time spent absorbing / using / practicing the information from the lesson, followed by testing. People who passed the test are paired up with people who didn't for tutoring and practice together. Repeat until all have passed the test or all the allotted time has passed. This makes a good use of available personnel, allows brighter students to improve their own teaching skills, and builds esprit de corps. It works just as well teaching learning disabled trainees how to assemble and disassemble their weapons quickly as it does teaching college educated trainees the various complicated permutations of the Soviet Order of Battle. I still remember a much higher percentage of the information I learned in the Army than any other levels of education I received.

 

[Jolly Rogerer]

How do we determine who is a good teacher?

Test their students before and after.

 

[downtown]

Test their students before and after.

So if my test scores are the metric by which it's determined if i'm "good" or not, why would I teach at an urban school? Too risky to teach underprivileged kids who are already behind. Why not stick to the suburbs, where its far easier to get good scores?

 

[Lay_Lay]

By having the teachers be managed by managers who treat it like an education business.
Like in the real world, how things get done.