Posted on 12/21/2005 1:13:09 PM PST by DeweyCA
Everyone knows that schools are plagued with a variety of problems, but much of what everyone thinks about education is just a myth, say Jay Greene and Marcus Winters (Manhattan Institute).
To begin repairing America's schools, five myths about money, class-size, teacher-pay, college-access and high-stakes testing need to be cleared away, says Greene and Winters:
Average federal and state spending is almost $500 billion each year for public K-12 schools, or about $10,000 per pupil per year; that's more than the $430 billion we spent on national defense in 2004. Studies of class-size reduction show no visible effects; the average student-to-teacher ratio dropped from 22.3 (1970) to 16.1 (2002), yet student achievement didn't improve. In 2002, the average elementary school teacher made $30.75 per hour, which is a considerable amount when compared to other public servants, such as firefighters ($17.91) and police officers ($22.64). The primary barrier to college for low-income and minority students is academic, not financial; about 4 million students enter high school each year, only 2.8 million graduate and only 1.3 million meet the formal qualifications to apply to college. High- and low-stake standardized tests produce similar results; and although high-stakes testing may put pressure on schools to teach the skills required by the test, the evidence suggests that it doesn't encourage any type of manipulation. Unfortunately, these myths are so prevalent because we think direct experiences give us all the evidence we need; however, they are limited and distorted by our own participation, says Greene and Winters.
Furthermore, these myths do real harm by misdiagnosing our schools' real problems -- and by steering us away from real solutions, says Greene and Winters.
Source: Jay P. Greene and Marcus A. Winters, "Five Myths . . . crying out for debunking, " Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, October 2005.
For text:
http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/_national_rev-five_myths.htm
For more on Education:
http://www.ncpa.org/iss/edu/
I'm glad to see this in print and glad to see they stated teacher salaries on an hourly basis.
I've long railed at the conventional wisdowm that "teachers are underpayed". That's bull. Look at their hours (or lack thereof) per year.
I talked to a middle school teacher in Cleveland who makes in the $80s / yr with gold plated bennies. Granted she has lots of seniority - and no dobut I would want her job - but nonetheless the claim of being underpayed just doesn't wash.
Myth Buster #1
"the average student-to-teacher ratio dropped from 22.3 (1970) to 16.1 (2002), yet student achievement didn't improve."
You have to look at how they measure these things. In my district the average student to teacher ratio is something like 6 to 1. That is because they average in the special ed classes where the ratio is 1 to 1 or 2 to 1 with the regular classes where the ratio is 30 to 1. If they were to give an honest measure, which IMO would mean eliminating special ed or remedial classes and just measure the real mainstream class ratios, then the statistic might be meaningful.
Furthermore, I believe they count a lot of teachers (and maybe teacher's aides, too) that should NOT be in the tally because they do little or nothing (some aides I've seen spend all day leaning against the bookcase and have practically no interaction with the kids). IIRC, in my district, they count librarians and other non-classroom personnel.
Also, the student to teacher ratio may be only remotely related to class size. If you have 5 teachers and 30 students thats a 6 to 1 ratio, but if each teacher only teaches for one hour with all students in the class, then the class size is 30.
Another myth; Many people think the teachers, schools, or government is at fault for poor achievement, but a lot of the time the problem is the children’s parents. Those who don’t achieve often are not taught to respect western educated role models at home, and in many cases the parents themselves are illiterate or don’t speak English or both.
I would say most times it is the fault of the parent(s). Unfortunately, today seems to be all about single parenthood.
It would appear remedial math would be a good thing for you to look into.
Could you point out my specific math error? Thanks.
The real myth about "Education" is that it has anything to do with education.
Another myth:
"No child left behind will improve schools and test scores."
The reality is that this program has opened the door to micromanagement of curriculum and the shunning of creative energy and innovation in the classroom. It also shifts resources to poorly performing students and away from those with great potential. Since most poor performers have endemic problems at home, the cost/improvement ratio will be very small for the low students, while the brightest students will suffer greatly.
In most large cities--inner city--the mean I.Q. is 85. This means that half of students will have substantial difficulty in completing high school. This IQ disparity includes all races. While there are some exceptionally bright and good students in the inner city, most are as described. Generally, it is assumed an I.Q. of 85 or better is required to graduate from HS. It is no wonder that in many inner city neighborhoods the graduation rate is only 50%.
What is really troubling, is most school systems do not account for this. In the past states such as California prohibited any kind of school sponsored IQ testing. People naturally resent the implication that intelligence falls on a bell shaped distribution and our current egalitarian ethic is responsible for many of the mistaken policies taken in education.
As Murray and others have pointed out, recognizing the inner city problem does not mean giving in to despair or reducing effort; on the contrary, more and better services are needed to help those less endowed than the average student.
Now that would require logic. We can't have that.
So, what's your point? Through 12 years of grammar school and high school my clas size was 25 or more and we learned. Because, the schools were allowed to require discipline in the classroom.
If you want to fix education, hire people who can read and write.
You are so right. I believe in educating all children, but there is a limit to what each of us can do. For some, that limit is at a very low level and all the money in the world is not going to raise them up. To a large extent, giving more resources to the brightest students would have the greatest benefit to all.
And more money isn't always the answer at either the top or the bottom of the scale. Sometimes money gets in the way of learning. Often it just gives administrators something to fight over and gets blown on a lot of useless programs or equipment.
My point was that what statistics claimed as student to teacher ratios were an illusion. My point was that they should not try to draw conclusions on whether lower ratios improved learning if it was based on "fake" statistics.
I agree with your point about discipline. If it were up to me to make a choice between smaller class size and good discipline, I'd choose good discipline. If you have a class with 2 kids and one of them spends all day having tantrums, the other kid is cheated out of learning time.
I, too, have had a lot of classes of 25 or more (100s in college lectures) and learned. I do think, though, that with fewer students, the teachers have more time to spend with each child and are more able to spot problems and fix them.
It just seems logical that with 15 students in a class that a teacher would have more time with each student than in a class of 30. Yet, this doesn't seem to happen.
I just finished student teaching in a low income school. The entire day (full day kindergarten) was scheduled. There was no "extra" time to take one or two students aside and work on recognizing numbers or counting. The students do have free time (20 minutes) and quiet time (15 minutes), and recess (15 minutes) but they are 5 years old and in school from 7:45-3:00. They need that down time.
The teacher has very little leeway within the schedule to provide time for one on one work. I hope I can find a way to do things differently once I have my own classroom.
In my 30 years in the classroom, I found weak administrators to be a bigger problem than poor parenting. Most parents could be asked for cooperation and would, at least, attempt to aid in the education of their child.
A poor principal was there until the community could bear it it no longer. Then the school superintendent would move him/her to another school or to the county office. In my experience, students' preformance levels almost always rose when the new administrator came in.
30 - 35 students/ classroom
1 teacher/ classroom
There are two problems in that one! OY!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.