I teach at a local school, subjects I know and have worked with over 30+ years of professional life. I teach with wonderful people, it is the best job I have ever had.
What is the downside? Here are a few. "Time to update your performance review". "But wait didn't I just do that?" . "No, that was the annual review, you need to update it every six months, with last years' final report and next year's evaluation plan needed now". Note: I plodded along for a number of years, then decided to spice them up. Add a little Immanual Kant, MLK Jr, etc quotes. Even added a few interesting experiences I have had. And yet no one has ever commented on them, it falls into the bureaucratic abyss. Thank goodness.
"Time to update your work load document and the semester schedule." Need this every semester, three times a year, in the proper ever changing bureacratic format.
Don't forget to update the syllabus to the latest bureaucratic requirements. The changes in syllabi are usually word and definition changes that are required by certifications. Which are constantly being updated responding to the current academic whims.
Additionally there are the requirements to address how you are going to improve your students lives by initiating in your courses the latest trends fads and whims which change every three to five years. And are soon forgotten but for the frustration they left behind.
You will note that none of these required exercises addresses my being a better teacher in my subjects, just responding to a bureaucrats needs.
So why do I stick around? Great subjects, great students. Talk about diversity. Every letter in the alphabet. No one is in your face, they are all grateful because they know what America is all about. Most first or second generation. And I teach with great, caring teachers. We have great morale.
So what is going on? Somewhere in every educational system there are great leaders. These great leaders have hired great teachers and have gotten out of their way and let them teach, albeit with only a modicum of chickensh.t.(an old military expression) required by the remote higher ups.
I’ve had a number of teacher friends leave due to stress and burnout, even after a few years. One of the complaints is how much instruction time they now have to spend teaching students to take standardized tests. Another also has to do with management of student anxiety over not getting perfect A+ grades, or more bureaucracy. Both the letter to the editor and writer and the other fellow made good points but as always situations are nuanced and have to be taken on a case by case basis, depending on the school system we’re talking about
Sam Swope seems to be fantasizing that making teachers more respected and more trusted (how?) will somehow magically improve our educational system.
He writes: "Sure, there will be teachers who are bad actors, but you deal with them." How? As long as teacher unions protect bad teachers from being fired, there is absolutely no way to "deal with" bad teachers. And now it isn't just teacher unions protecting activist teachers; it's the Left broadly.
The training of teachers has been taken over by the academic Far Left. As a result, fewer and fewer people who are not eager Left-wing activists have chosen teaching as a profession. We have plenty of "smart, young, idealistic people" entering the teaching profession. Yet for some reason (perhaps their ideology?), they aren't turning out to be good teachers.
In terms of successful education systems just look at what is done elsewhere which made it that way. Canada (where I live), used to rank up near the top. The most significant change that occurred in the last 40 years - even more so than unionist interests- was de-emphasizing curriculum guidelines and lowering learning standards. The Dewey esque view that a child was a vessel simply waiting to discover for him/herself , eschewing explicit and teacher led instruction, is central to the rise of progressive Ed policies and inquiry based learning. Does curriculum need to be mandated? At this point, absolutely. Do teachers need to focus on the 3 Rs? 100%. Do parents need to instil a culture of respect and responsibility for their children’s education? You bet. But NONE of this will matter, unless Ed leaders up their game and focus on what works. Curriculum is key.
The teacher issue seems relatively simple. Privatize schools, get rid of unions, vouchers for parents.
Teachers are paid well... if they have seniority. That's how unions work. This is why the best and brightest students avoid teaching if they can.
DEI-infested schools will underperform, so parents with choices will send their children to schools that actually educate. Except in New York City, where Robin DeiAngelo has apparently cloned herself and given birth to an entire generation of children sacrificed on the pyre of white guilt.
It is equally true that teachers are, in general, poorly prepared and that more oversight is not the answer. Education Departments have the lowest SATs on campus, but student teachers are told that they hold some special insights that no one else has to teach our children. They graduate knowing that they are ill-prepared, which is why they are resentful of parents who want to have a say in the classroom, no matter the parents' qualifications. The answer is to quit getting teachers from Education Departments. Someone who majored in biology and worked in the private sector is far more qualified to teach science in middle and high school than an Ed Major. That person is also used to meeting business goals. Moreover, they chose teaching after trying other things, not as the default when they didn't know anything else. Give me a few motivated teachers who don't know all the latest teaching fads but are used to getting things done over an Ed Major any day.
It used to be that a teacher's certificate was granted by examination. If you had a good mastery of the material, you got a certificate.
That didn't necessarily mean you were a good teacher. But if it turned out that you were bad at teaching, you didn't have 4+ years of university study and a mountain of student debt to discourage you from seeking a different profession. Nor did you have a union that would protect you from being fired when the school realized you were bad teacher.
What it *did* mean was that you were smart and knowledgeable about the subject matter you were teaching. There is no guarantee of that with today's teachers, in spite of 4+ years of college.
The problem is nobody like the person you describe is going to take the pay cut to become a teacher. Anyone graduating in the top third of their college class is going to do the easy math and take a job at Google, become a doctor or lawyer, or heck even join a marketing firm before becoming a teacher. If we want to attract the top minds to teaching, we must pay teachers more to change this calculus. Teaching colleges have to be much more selective, which they will be able to be once teaching becomes a highly desirable field. Curriculum standards always need to be upheld, as anyone who has been in any leadership position will tell you that you can't measure how well you're doing without defining metrics to assess that. Yes, right now we recoil at metrics, because the State and school districts have to micromanage mediocre teachers. If this field had more professionals (and weaker unions), this would change too. Most importantly, schools must stand behind their teachers. No professional is going to take the daily disrespect that teachers are currently expected to put up with and get blamed for.
Whether schools are public or private I think is a much more complex matter. There are plenty of private schools that are no better, or worse, than the public system, and I don't think that the fact that parents were able to choose them makes it any better. The goal is educating students, not empowering parents (not saying parents shouldn't be empowered, just that it doesn't override the child's education). Any doctor who has worked in corporate medicine can tell you how broken the system is, and the only value of big healthcare corporations is their bottom line, and they will cut any corner to make it happen. I don't think people who push for fully privatizing education appreciate these risks. On the other hand, the public system as it is, is clearly failing us, outside of some school districts where educated parents hold their schools to a higher standard. On one hand, I think if other countries can have good public school systems, then we are capable of it too. On the other hand, the public schools have been failing so badly for so long, and the teachers unions will block any attempt to change them, that I think some kind of public/private partnership may be the answer here. I don't know, and honestly I'd love an FP series on K-12 education from deeply thoughtful and knowledgeable people who can go beyond the surface-level talking points we constantly hear about.
Another thought I had was to reduce the administrative ‘state’ of public education. I’ve seen this administrative system punish good teachers, ignore bad, very bad teachers and basically operate with zero accountability. In my kids public school system the number of administrators has grown significantly while student enrollment has decreased. My kids high school has 10 principals in total each ‘in charge’ of specific aspects of the school but if you have a question or an issue with that area you are met wjth general incompetence. School choice please! Free market ideals may save
I agree that teachers should be well educated in what they will be teaching, but I disagree that a degreed biologist can walk into a classroom and be effective. Learning how to support and foster student learning is equally important. Do Ed departments do this effectively? Maybe…I think most young teachers learn the most from their time as student teachers.
Oh and how about if we paid them as professionals? Enough with this nonsense that they only work 9 months. They put in 12-14 hr days routinely. And they have to put up with parents who disrespect, and denigrate them in front of their children/students.
I'm in my early 70s but when I was a student in school the situation was very different. My parents never challenged the teachers. It was always "What did you do?" and more often than not, it was the correct question to be asking.
I hope for my grandchildren's sake that we as a society settle somewhere between teacher as deity and teacher as footstool. Neither attitude is healthy.
It always boils down to leadership.
I teach at a local school, subjects I know and have worked with over 30+ years of professional life. I teach with wonderful people, it is the best job I have ever had.
What is the downside? Here are a few. "Time to update your performance review". "But wait didn't I just do that?" . "No, that was the annual review, you need to update it every six months, with last years' final report and next year's evaluation plan needed now". Note: I plodded along for a number of years, then decided to spice them up. Add a little Immanual Kant, MLK Jr, etc quotes. Even added a few interesting experiences I have had. And yet no one has ever commented on them, it falls into the bureaucratic abyss. Thank goodness.
"Time to update your work load document and the semester schedule." Need this every semester, three times a year, in the proper ever changing bureacratic format.
Don't forget to update the syllabus to the latest bureaucratic requirements. The changes in syllabi are usually word and definition changes that are required by certifications. Which are constantly being updated responding to the current academic whims.
Additionally there are the requirements to address how you are going to improve your students lives by initiating in your courses the latest trends fads and whims which change every three to five years. And are soon forgotten but for the frustration they left behind.
You will note that none of these required exercises addresses my being a better teacher in my subjects, just responding to a bureaucrats needs.
So why do I stick around? Great subjects, great students. Talk about diversity. Every letter in the alphabet. No one is in your face, they are all grateful because they know what America is all about. Most first or second generation. And I teach with great, caring teachers. We have great morale.
So what is going on? Somewhere in every educational system there are great leaders. These great leaders have hired great teachers and have gotten out of their way and let them teach, albeit with only a modicum of chickensh.t.(an old military expression) required by the remote higher ups.
I’ve had a number of teacher friends leave due to stress and burnout, even after a few years. One of the complaints is how much instruction time they now have to spend teaching students to take standardized tests. Another also has to do with management of student anxiety over not getting perfect A+ grades, or more bureaucracy. Both the letter to the editor and writer and the other fellow made good points but as always situations are nuanced and have to be taken on a case by case basis, depending on the school system we’re talking about
Sam Swope seems to be fantasizing that making teachers more respected and more trusted (how?) will somehow magically improve our educational system.
He writes: "Sure, there will be teachers who are bad actors, but you deal with them." How? As long as teacher unions protect bad teachers from being fired, there is absolutely no way to "deal with" bad teachers. And now it isn't just teacher unions protecting activist teachers; it's the Left broadly.
The training of teachers has been taken over by the academic Far Left. As a result, fewer and fewer people who are not eager Left-wing activists have chosen teaching as a profession. We have plenty of "smart, young, idealistic people" entering the teaching profession. Yet for some reason (perhaps their ideology?), they aren't turning out to be good teachers.
In terms of successful education systems just look at what is done elsewhere which made it that way. Canada (where I live), used to rank up near the top. The most significant change that occurred in the last 40 years - even more so than unionist interests- was de-emphasizing curriculum guidelines and lowering learning standards. The Dewey esque view that a child was a vessel simply waiting to discover for him/herself , eschewing explicit and teacher led instruction, is central to the rise of progressive Ed policies and inquiry based learning. Does curriculum need to be mandated? At this point, absolutely. Do teachers need to focus on the 3 Rs? 100%. Do parents need to instil a culture of respect and responsibility for their children’s education? You bet. But NONE of this will matter, unless Ed leaders up their game and focus on what works. Curriculum is key.
Thanks for creating a space for others to write their letters to the editors. Enjoyed reading their viewpoints.
The teacher issue seems relatively simple. Privatize schools, get rid of unions, vouchers for parents.
Teachers are paid well... if they have seniority. That's how unions work. This is why the best and brightest students avoid teaching if they can.
DEI-infested schools will underperform, so parents with choices will send their children to schools that actually educate. Except in New York City, where Robin DeiAngelo has apparently cloned herself and given birth to an entire generation of children sacrificed on the pyre of white guilt.
It is equally true that teachers are, in general, poorly prepared and that more oversight is not the answer. Education Departments have the lowest SATs on campus, but student teachers are told that they hold some special insights that no one else has to teach our children. They graduate knowing that they are ill-prepared, which is why they are resentful of parents who want to have a say in the classroom, no matter the parents' qualifications. The answer is to quit getting teachers from Education Departments. Someone who majored in biology and worked in the private sector is far more qualified to teach science in middle and high school than an Ed Major. That person is also used to meeting business goals. Moreover, they chose teaching after trying other things, not as the default when they didn't know anything else. Give me a few motivated teachers who don't know all the latest teaching fads but are used to getting things done over an Ed Major any day.
It used to be that a teacher's certificate was granted by examination. If you had a good mastery of the material, you got a certificate.
That didn't necessarily mean you were a good teacher. But if it turned out that you were bad at teaching, you didn't have 4+ years of university study and a mountain of student debt to discourage you from seeking a different profession. Nor did you have a union that would protect you from being fired when the school realized you were bad teacher.
What it *did* mean was that you were smart and knowledgeable about the subject matter you were teaching. There is no guarantee of that with today's teachers, in spite of 4+ years of college.
The problem is nobody like the person you describe is going to take the pay cut to become a teacher. Anyone graduating in the top third of their college class is going to do the easy math and take a job at Google, become a doctor or lawyer, or heck even join a marketing firm before becoming a teacher. If we want to attract the top minds to teaching, we must pay teachers more to change this calculus. Teaching colleges have to be much more selective, which they will be able to be once teaching becomes a highly desirable field. Curriculum standards always need to be upheld, as anyone who has been in any leadership position will tell you that you can't measure how well you're doing without defining metrics to assess that. Yes, right now we recoil at metrics, because the State and school districts have to micromanage mediocre teachers. If this field had more professionals (and weaker unions), this would change too. Most importantly, schools must stand behind their teachers. No professional is going to take the daily disrespect that teachers are currently expected to put up with and get blamed for.
Whether schools are public or private I think is a much more complex matter. There are plenty of private schools that are no better, or worse, than the public system, and I don't think that the fact that parents were able to choose them makes it any better. The goal is educating students, not empowering parents (not saying parents shouldn't be empowered, just that it doesn't override the child's education). Any doctor who has worked in corporate medicine can tell you how broken the system is, and the only value of big healthcare corporations is their bottom line, and they will cut any corner to make it happen. I don't think people who push for fully privatizing education appreciate these risks. On the other hand, the public system as it is, is clearly failing us, outside of some school districts where educated parents hold their schools to a higher standard. On one hand, I think if other countries can have good public school systems, then we are capable of it too. On the other hand, the public schools have been failing so badly for so long, and the teachers unions will block any attempt to change them, that I think some kind of public/private partnership may be the answer here. I don't know, and honestly I'd love an FP series on K-12 education from deeply thoughtful and knowledgeable people who can go beyond the surface-level talking points we constantly hear about.
Another thought I had was to reduce the administrative ‘state’ of public education. I’ve seen this administrative system punish good teachers, ignore bad, very bad teachers and basically operate with zero accountability. In my kids public school system the number of administrators has grown significantly while student enrollment has decreased. My kids high school has 10 principals in total each ‘in charge’ of specific aspects of the school but if you have a question or an issue with that area you are met wjth general incompetence. School choice please! Free market ideals may save
I agree that teachers should be well educated in what they will be teaching, but I disagree that a degreed biologist can walk into a classroom and be effective. Learning how to support and foster student learning is equally important. Do Ed departments do this effectively? Maybe…I think most young teachers learn the most from their time as student teachers.
Oh and how about if we paid them as professionals? Enough with this nonsense that they only work 9 months. They put in 12-14 hr days routinely. And they have to put up with parents who disrespect, and denigrate them in front of their children/students.
I'm in my early 70s but when I was a student in school the situation was very different. My parents never challenged the teachers. It was always "What did you do?" and more often than not, it was the correct question to be asking.
I hope for my grandchildren's sake that we as a society settle somewhere between teacher as deity and teacher as footstool. Neither attitude is healthy.