6 ms·

It seems like there are so few teachers now. Maybe the first problem to solve is why we as a nation don't invest more in paying good wages to our teachers.

w1ntermute 14y ago
These issues with teachers are largely in school districts in poor areas. The wealthy suburban school district I attended had no issues with teacher quality, and friends I made in college from all over the country confirmed this to be true on the national level. Since school districts are primarily funded by local taxes, poor children end up with bad teachers. I believe this is what NCLB was created to fix, but that wasn't successful for a variety of reasons, the most prominent of which was probably the tying of funding to continual yearly improvement in standardized test scores.
- dragonwriter 14y ago
  Actually, the problem isn't just school districts being funded by local taxes -- even states that have statewide policies that equalize funding have the same problem. The thing is, poor school districts are often, comparatively, unattractive and unsafe places to work even with the same expenditures of funds (because they are often in unattractive and unsafe communities), so teachers often don't want to work there. (And NCLB wasn't created to fix this problem, it was created to divert funding from education to private testing vendors and provide a mechanism to rate public schools as failing as a political maneuver to build support for privatization of schools.)
  - w1ntermute 14y ago
    > The thing is, poor school districts are often, comparatively, unattractive and unsafe places to work even with the same expenditures of funds Why is this problem so difficult to fix, at least within the school environment? Schools are a relatively confined space and should be quite easy to police. > And NCLB wasn't created to fix this problem, it was created to divert funding from education to private testing vendors and provide a mechanism to rate public schools as failing as a political maneuver to build support for privatization of schools. Sure, that could very likely be the ulterior motive for the program (among other similar theories), but the public justification for NCLB was nevertheless to improve schools in poor areas.
    - japhyr 14y ago
      "Schools are a relatively confined space and should be quite easy to police." It's about a lot more than "policing" a confined space. It's about dealing with all of the issues that come with high-poverty areas. Children come to school hungry, tired, and traumatized. They have had ineffective teachers for multiple years in the past. Many have already given up, because they have felt given up on. These are not "quite easy" problems to fix.
      - ktsmith 14y ago
        > They have had ineffective teachers for multiple years in the past. Even those that have been fortunate enough to have great teachers may not be doing as well as their peers in schools with better economic surroundings. Having involved parents can make a huge difference in academic achievement. > Children come to school hungry Year after year the one thing my wife will point out as having made a positive impact at the schools she's taught at has been her students getting breakfast at school every day as part of the routine. Initially she found it disruptive but over time they have logged fewer behavior related incidents, fewer nurse visits and more attentiveness in the morning. It's an anecdote but four years without it followed by four years with it and she's convinced. All eight years were at Title I schools with 100% free/reduced lunch as well as the before and after school meal program. The specific change was serving the morning meal in the classroom ensuring the kids were getting it.
    - dragonwriter 14y ago
      It is difficult to fix "within the school environment" because it is a problem with the socioeconomic environment within which the school environment is embedded (including the population from which the school draws pupils), and it involves the area through which teachers have to transit to get to the school. Correcting for it maybe can be done, but it costs money, which means even with state level policies which aim to equalize school funding across rich and poor districts the poor districts end up behind in terms of academic resources, because they have to spend more money counteracting the effects of being in poor districts.
    - tossacct 14y ago
- ktsmith 14y ago
  School funding often breaks down at the state level not the local level though it varies by state of course. Simply being in a wealthy suburb does not mean that your school has any more funding than a school in a poor area. In fact it's quite likely that your schools received significantly less money than schools in poorer areas due to federal funding via grants and things like Title I.
  - w1ntermute 14y ago
    In that case, why are there not better teachers in poor school districts? After all, if my school was receiving less funding and still had good teachers, then those poor districts must have stellar teachers. And yet we continue to hear about how teachers suck.
    - japhyr 14y ago
      The higher level of funding does not translate to higher-paid teachers. That money goes to supporting students. It can be used to implement school breakfast programs, hire additional support staff, develop afterschool programs, etc. But a school can't just decide to pay its teachers more. The other important answer to this question is that low pay is not the major disincentive for working in an urban school. It's the challenges of working in a high-poverty environment. Those challenges are numerous, and pretty well documented. There are many similar issues in low-income rural areas.
      - w1ntermute 14y ago
        > But a school can't just decide to pay its teachers more. Why not? If there are so many environmental reasons why teaching at such a school is disincentivized, providing a monetary incentive could bring in teachers.
        ktsmith 14y ago
        > Why not? State law prevents it in many cases. Collective bargaining agreements with unions, standard pay scales etc.
jpwagner 14y ago
The article addresses this. Do you have an argument to make?

w1ntermute 14y ago

These issues with teachers are largely in school districts in poor areas. The wealthy suburban school district I attended had no issues with teacher quality, and friends I made in college from all over the country confirmed this to be true on the national level. Since school districts are primarily funded by local taxes, poor children end up with bad teachers. I believe this is what NCLB was created to fix, but that wasn't successful for a variety of reasons, the most prominent of which was probably the tying of funding to continual yearly improvement in standardized test scores.

dragonwriter 14y ago
Actually, the problem isn't just school districts being funded by local taxes -- even states that have statewide policies that equalize funding have the same problem. The thing is, poor school districts are often, comparatively, unattractive and unsafe places to work even with the same expenditures of funds (because they are often in unattractive and unsafe communities), so teachers often don't want to work there. (And NCLB wasn't created to fix this problem, it was created to divert funding from education to private testing vendors and provide a mechanism to rate public schools as failing as a political maneuver to build support for privatization of schools.)
- w1ntermute 14y ago
  > The thing is, poor school districts are often, comparatively, unattractive and unsafe places to work even with the same expenditures of funds Why is this problem so difficult to fix, at least within the school environment? Schools are a relatively confined space and should be quite easy to police. > And NCLB wasn't created to fix this problem, it was created to divert funding from education to private testing vendors and provide a mechanism to rate public schools as failing as a political maneuver to build support for privatization of schools. Sure, that could very likely be the ulterior motive for the program (among other similar theories), but the public justification for NCLB was nevertheless to improve schools in poor areas.
  - japhyr 14y ago
    "Schools are a relatively confined space and should be quite easy to police." It's about a lot more than "policing" a confined space. It's about dealing with all of the issues that come with high-poverty areas. Children come to school hungry, tired, and traumatized. They have had ineffective teachers for multiple years in the past. Many have already given up, because they have felt given up on. These are not "quite easy" problems to fix.
    - ktsmith 14y ago
      > They have had ineffective teachers for multiple years in the past. Even those that have been fortunate enough to have great teachers may not be doing as well as their peers in schools with better economic surroundings. Having involved parents can make a huge difference in academic achievement. > Children come to school hungry Year after year the one thing my wife will point out as having made a positive impact at the schools she's taught at has been her students getting breakfast at school every day as part of the routine. Initially she found it disruptive but over time they have logged fewer behavior related incidents, fewer nurse visits and more attentiveness in the morning. It's an anecdote but four years without it followed by four years with it and she's convinced. All eight years were at Title I schools with 100% free/reduced lunch as well as the before and after school meal program. The specific change was serving the morning meal in the classroom ensuring the kids were getting it.
  - dragonwriter 14y ago
    It is difficult to fix "within the school environment" because it is a problem with the socioeconomic environment within which the school environment is embedded (including the population from which the school draws pupils), and it involves the area through which teachers have to transit to get to the school. Correcting for it maybe can be done, but it costs money, which means even with state level policies which aim to equalize school funding across rich and poor districts the poor districts end up behind in terms of academic resources, because they have to spend more money counteracting the effects of being in poor districts.
  - tossacct 14y ago
ktsmith 14y ago
School funding often breaks down at the state level not the local level though it varies by state of course. Simply being in a wealthy suburb does not mean that your school has any more funding than a school in a poor area. In fact it's quite likely that your schools received significantly less money than schools in poorer areas due to federal funding via grants and things like Title I.
- w1ntermute 14y ago
  In that case, why are there not better teachers in poor school districts? After all, if my school was receiving less funding and still had good teachers, then those poor districts must have stellar teachers. And yet we continue to hear about how teachers suck.
  - japhyr 14y ago
    The higher level of funding does not translate to higher-paid teachers. That money goes to supporting students. It can be used to implement school breakfast programs, hire additional support staff, develop afterschool programs, etc. But a school can't just decide to pay its teachers more. The other important answer to this question is that low pay is not the major disincentive for working in an urban school. It's the challenges of working in a high-poverty environment. Those challenges are numerous, and pretty well documented. There are many similar issues in low-income rural areas.
    - w1ntermute 14y ago
      > But a school can't just decide to pay its teachers more. Why not? If there are so many environmental reasons why teaching at such a school is disincentivized, providing a monetary incentive could bring in teachers.
      - ktsmith 14y ago
        > Why not? State law prevents it in many cases. Collective bargaining agreements with unions, standard pay scales etc.

jpwagner 14y ago

The article addresses this. Do you have an argument to make?