Thread: The College Industrial Complex

Originally Posted by OSECS

Why do you say that ? Not just anybody can be a successful teacher (that's the point and key). Everyone has had those teachers that you really loved because they were so damn good at what they did. They don't/didn't come along every day or every year sometimes.

So why don't we hold all teachers to a standard of excellence like that? That's where the problem is IMO. Perhaps, as it stands now it is too easy to become a teacher. Weed out the ones who don't belong, pay the good ones more and measure them all by the same yardstick.

Never gonna happen, sadly.

Originally Posted by Downbound Train

But more people are cut out to be teachers. That's why it should pay less money.

annnnnnnnd this is why everyone on here thinks you're an ignorant buffoon. If so many people are "cut out to be teachers" then why is there such a lack of good teachers? Do you consider your college roommate you referred to earlier as "cut out to be a teacher?" I sure as hell don't think he was. He was capable of obtaining a college degree and getting his teaching certificate but he is far from being "cut out to be a teacher." I could make it through law school, doesn't mean I'm cut out to be a lawyer. This is why you think teachers are of no value, you obviously have no clue what it takes to be a good teacher. Many of those engineers you hold in such high regard couldn't teach effectively. They may be smart as hell but they have no clue how to help someone else learn what they know. A good teacher can transfer what they know to 20 others so those other people can then go on to do 20 times what any individual could've done by him/herself. The saying should go "those who can't teach, do." Tons of people can "do" things but few can teach them to someone else.

Originally Posted by flyandski365

So why don't we hold all teachers to a standard of excellence like that? That's where the problem is IMO. Perhaps, as it stands now it is too easy to become a teacher. Weed out the ones who don't belong, pay the good ones more and measure them all by the same yardstick.

Never gonna happen, sadly.

There's the rub. You want people who will be effective and you've got to lure them to the profession with an attractive pay standard. So yeah, how do you weed out the bad apples ? Stripping teachers of the outmoded (in some respects I think) tenure system would be a start. Replace it with a quantifiable method of measuring student success under their tutelage. Those that maintain and exceed standards get raises. Those that don't get culled out of the profession.

Originally Posted by ilikecandy

partly because engineering is one of the few fields where a masters is typically the terminal degree

Not sure what crackerjack u you went to, but a Masters most definitely isn't the typical terminal degree. Plenty of PHDs; plenty of engineers who receive a Masters in something other than "engineering"

Originally Posted by OSECS

There's the rub. You want people who will be effective and you've got to lure them to the profession with an attractive pay standard. So yeah, how do you weed out the bad apples ? Stripping teachers of the outmoded (in some respects I think) tenure system would be a start. Replace it with a quantifiable method of measuring student success under their tutelage. Those that maintain and exceed standards get raises. Those that don't get culled out of the profession.

100% agree we need to get rid of tenure. It made it so difficult just to get into DPS as a new teacher. If a teacher who has 3 years or more under their belt gets let go from a school they must be found a job before anyone w/out tenure and they must have a job somewhere. It's complete bullshit. Getting rid of tenure alone would weed out 70% of the bad teachers. Every time a school dumps one of those shitty teachers another school in the district is forced to hire him or her. "Waiting for Superman" is an even more extreme example of this (I believe in NYC) where teachers are put in a room with each other and paid to sit because no one wants to hire them.

The toughest part is rating them. Even I still haven't figured that part out. Especially as a high school teacher. Lets say I'm teaching Algebra 2, by the time a student gets to me they might not even know fractions. How the fuck do you rate their progress in Alg2 if I spend half my year teaching them remedial math because their other teachers have just pushed them on until now. It's not just the teachers fault either. In my district it's almost impossible to fail a child. If you do, you get scolded by the administration for bringing down their school performance framework (the current rating system which will undoubtedly have a new acronym next year). When a student does fail a class they're not allowed to repeat it. Yep, you heard me correctly, they can't repeat the course with a teacher. They're put in a computer lab where they take the course in front of a computer and expected to learn themselves. Mind you, they're trying to finish Algebra 2 Semester 1 on the computer while they're in Algebra 2 Semester 2 in the teacher-led classroom. How are they supposed to pass the second semester if they didn't pass the first?? This has as much if not more to do w/ overcrowding (they can't repeat the course because there physically isn't enough room for them to do so) and the system itself than it does just the teachers.

Originally Posted by nobueno

annnnnnnnd this is why everyone on here thinks you're an ignorant buffoon. If so many people are "cut out to be teachers" then why is there such a lack of good teachers? Do you consider your college roommate you referred to earlier as "cut out to be a teacher?" I sure as hell don't think he was. He was capable of obtaining a college degree and getting his teaching certificate but he is far from being "cut out to be a teacher." I could make it through law school, doesn't mean I'm cut out to be a lawyer. This is why you think teachers are of no value, you obviously have no clue what it takes to be a good teacher. Many of those engineers you hold in such high regard couldn't teach effectively. They may be smart as hell but they have no clue how to help someone else learn what they know. A good teacher can transfer what they know to 20 others so those other people can then go on to do 20 times what any individual could've done by him/herself. The saying should go "those who can't teach, do." Tons of people can "do" things but few can teach them to someone else.

There is no market for "good" teachers. No effort is made to have "Good" teachers. A teacher that passes the initial interview process is in for life. In most businesses, people who pass the initial interview process don't make it. In my industry there is a 50% turnover rate annually.

There is a shortage of good teachers because all the good teacher positions are filled by bad teachers no one can get rid of. If the market dictated the price for a GOOD teacher, good teachers could be hired and accumulated by schools and their true market value could be determined.

Most people who are motivated to be "Better" than their peers don't choose a career that doesn't distinguish suck from real talent with it's pay plan.

Why would a worker in any job go over and above the minimum requirement if there is no chance for more compensation or advancement? That's the reason communism can't work. No one gives a shit. That's the reason the government can't do anything as well as the private sector. Minimal incentive to give a shit.

My college room mate may or may not be a good teacher but one thing I know is that he's still a teacher. He probably wouldn't be one if schools could fire teachers without jumping through 30,000 union loopholes. Chances are there would be a better one in his place . (Multiply that by 1,000,000)

Originally Posted by nobueno

100% agree we need to get rid of tenure. It made it so difficult just to get into DPS as a new teacher. If a teacher who has 3 years or more under their belt gets let go from a school they must be found a job before anyone w/out tenure and they must have a job somewhere. It's complete bullshit. Getting rid of tenure alone would weed out 70% of the bad teachers. Every time a school dumps one of those shitty teachers another school in the district is forced to hire him or her. "Waiting for Superman" is an even more extreme example of this (I believe in NYC) where teachers are put in a room with each other and paid to sit because no one wants to hire them.

The toughest part is rating them. Even I still haven't figured that part out. Especially as a high school teacher. Lets say I'm teaching Algebra 2, by the time a student gets to me they might not even know fractions. How the fuck do you rate their progress in Alg2 if I spend half my year teaching them remedial math because their other teachers have just pushed them on until now. It's not just the teachers fault either. In my district it's almost impossible to fail a child. If you do, you get scolded by the administration for bringing down their school performance framework (the current rating system which will undoubtedly have a new acronym next year). When a student does fail a class they're not allowed to repeat it. Yep, you heard me correctly, they can't repeat the course with a teacher. They're put in a computer lab where they take the course in front of a computer and expected to learn themselves. Mind you, they're trying to finish Algebra 2 Semester 1 on the computer while they're in Algebra 2 Semester 2 in the teacher-led classroom. How are they supposed to pass the second semester if they didn't pass the first?? This has as much if not more to do w/ overcrowding (they can't repeat the course because there physically isn't enough room for them to do so) and the system itself than it does just the teachers.

You just described a union / government clusterfuck. Privatize the system = fix the system.

Originally Posted by Pillsbury

HEY dumbass, are you paying any attention.

SOME teachers are overpaid. SOME teachers are underpaid.

If you dispute this, then you are the dumb fuck piece of shit.

SOME teachers shouldn't even have their job.

My issue is not with pay. It's with the Union that ensures all teachers regardless of competency earn the same.

Get a fucking clue, dick for brains.

I had no idea you were so well informed on the educational system, entertain me, how do you know all this to be fact?

So now you claim that all teacher earn the same $$$ regardless of their competency and level of education?

Classic............


And how can you be so dense to equate what I wrote with;

raising teacher salaries across the board

Being called stupid, dumb or an idiot by you is a badge of honor, keep it up, I wear your insults proudly.....

Originally Posted by nobueno

100% agree we need to get rid of tenure. It made it so difficult just to get into DPS as a new teacher. If a teacher who has 3 years or more under their belt gets let go from a school they must be found a job before anyone w/out tenure and they must have a job somewhere. It's complete bullshit. Getting rid of tenure alone would weed out 70% of the bad teachers. Every time a school dumps one of those shitty teachers another school in the district is forced to hire him or her. "Waiting for Superman" is an even more extreme example of this (I believe in NYC) where teachers are put in a room with each other and paid to sit because no one wants to hire them.

The toughest part is rating them. Even I still haven't figured that part out. Especially as a high school teacher. Lets say I'm teaching Algebra 2, by the time a student gets to me they might not even know fractions. How the fuck do you rate their progress in Alg2 if I spend half my year teaching them remedial math because their other teachers have just pushed them on until now. It's not just the teachers fault either. In my district it's almost impossible to fail a child. If you do, you get scolded by the administration for bringing down their school performance framework (the current rating system which will undoubtedly have a new acronym next year). When a student does fail a class they're not allowed to repeat it. Yep, you heard me correctly, they can't repeat the course with a teacher. They're put in a computer lab where they take the course in front of a computer and expected to learn themselves. Mind you, they're trying to finish Algebra 2 Semester 1 on the computer while they're in Algebra 2 Semester 2 in the teacher-led classroom. How are they supposed to pass the second semester if they didn't pass the first?? This has as much if not more to do w/ overcrowding (they can't repeat the course because there physically isn't enough room for them to do so) and the system itself than it does just the teachers.

Yeah, it's not something that's gonna get fixed over night. Your example of getting students who aren't prepared is spot on. Maybe it's a first day of class exam that sets the bar for the class going forward. At least you have a benchmark to work from.

The pisser is teachers in poor school districts where the kids are under achieving for all the reasons kids fail in those districts no parental involvement, no parents period in some cases, drugs, crime, etc. How do you rate those teachers ? How do those teachers get thru to those kids ? Watching "To Sir With Love" and taking notes on "Sirs" technique ain't gonna do it.

Originally Posted by Downbound Train

In my industry there is a 50% turnover rate annually.

Not to worry, the next Fast Food joint down the strip always has an opening for the Drive Through cashier.....

I just wrote above that I agree tenure needs to be eliminated. It does make me laugh though that you think some teachers won't go above and beyond because there isn't any room for advancement. Most of the great teachers are motivated by the students. Seeing them advance and grow is reward enough. I know it sounds cheesy as fuck but it really is true. We just want a fair wage. Plenty of economic studies that show that economic incentives don't actually produce better results especially in the long term.

Originally Posted by Bunion

I had no idea you were so well informed on the educational system, entertain me, how do you know all this to be fact?

So now you claim that all teacher earn the same $$$ regardless of their competency and level of education?

Classic............


And how can you be so dense to equate what I wrote with;


Being called stupid, dumb or an idiot by you is a badge of honor, keep it up, I wear your insults proudly.....

Well said.

DBS, when you're on the same side of an issue as dumbasstrain its probably a safe bet that you're working with shit information.

Originally Posted by Downbound Train

You just described a union / government clusterfuck. Privatize the system = fix the system.

Not so fast my friend (sorry i had to). Privatize the system and create a new set of problems. Any solution that is one and done fix all is not going to work.

Originally Posted by nobueno

I just wrote above that I agree tenure needs to be eliminated. It does make me laugh though that you think some teachers won't go above and beyond because there isn't any room for advancement. Most of the great teachers are motivated by the students. Seeing them advance and grow is reward enough. I know it sounds cheesy as fuck but it really is true. We just want a fair wage. Plenty of economic studies that show that economic incentives don't actually produce better results especially in the long term.

If you were addressing me, I agree some people have a passion for teaching and the money is second as long long as they're making an honest wage, but I still think you need to attract really bright people to the field and some/many of those are motivated by money as well as their chosen profession.

I've heard, don't go into architecture if you want to make a lot of money. Never stopped me, and I'm not rich by any stretch, but make a pretty good living doing exactly what I love. I wouldn't be in it though if I didn't think I could support myself and family, no matter how much I love it.

Bottom line is smarter students make better wage earners over time usually. So any way we can get there I'm OK with.

^^^
i was addressing dbt but i took too long to type.

Originally Posted by nobueno

Not so fast my friend (sorry i had to). Privatize the system and create a new set of problems. Any solution that is one and done fix all is not going to work.

OK, you are right. Keep the public school system as a daycare system for all the thugs who disrupt the real teaching and learning going on in the private school system. Maybe make those schools a branch of the US Army.

Originally Posted by Downbound Train

OK, you are right. Keep the public school system as a daycare system for all the thugs who disrupt the real teaching and learning going on in the private school system. Maybe make those schools a branch of the US Army.

Not very very accurate. Plenty of public school systems in the country as good if not better than some private schools, esp. when considering private college prep schools cost $12K and up a year.

Originally Posted by OSECS

Not very very accurate. Plenty of public school systems in the country as good if not better than some private schools, esp. when considering private college prep schools cost $12K and up a year.

I don't know about being a teacher, but being a TA sucks.

Sent from my Paranoid Android using TGR forums.

What do you guys think of charter schools? I know some recent education grads who are fighting tooth and nail to teach at these places, and parents who swear by them.

Originally Posted by flyandski365

What do you guys think of charter schools? I know some recent education grads who are fighting tooth and nail to teach at these places, and parents who swear by them.

Depends on the Charter School. There are oodles of them in DC, some great - focusing on Languages, Sciences, Math, classic education models, the arts, etc. The one I hope my daughter gets into is called "School w/o Walls" and does bi-weekly units, where you concentrate on one or two subjects, do traditional classroom teaching in the morning then go out into the field and see what you learned in action. Natural Science classes going to the Zoo, NIH, Botanical Gardens... Art & Music going to museums and theaters, etc. Their graduation rate is 100% and their college placement is 98%... the 2% of students opting to do a year or two in Public service first.

Then there are multiple flight-by-night schools that focus on Afro-centric learning, Urban wellness, or some other BS. They never seem to stick around for more than a year or two, yet new charters keep getting granted by the PC crowd.

Nobueno - don't know if you ever heard of the last DC Mayor's School Chancellor Michelle Rhee, but she actually proposed to teachers to voluntarily reject the tenure system and open an avenue to get more money above and beyond their salary through $$$ raised from private industry, including AOL and Microsoft. The Unions HATED her, but I miss her terribly.

Originally Posted by flyandski365

What do you guys think of charter schools? I know some recent education grads who are fighting tooth and nail to teach at these places, and parents who swear by them.

I'm definitely for the concept. Probably a few ways to achieve the end result.

Our local county school does this: specialty center schools within existing high schools . You don't have to go to your home school if you apply and are accepted into one of the specialty programs offered by our school district (math and science schools, language, engineering prep, 2 regional governors schools for gov't and international studies and performing arts.
Kids get trapped at bad schools that would benefit from the opportunity to being in one of these specialty schools with other kids motivated to learn. The country provides bus transportation. These accelerated programs actually start in 5th grade. Our daughter never went to her home school after 4th grade.

It's a huge success in our county. 800 rising freshman applied for 100 positions in the math and science program 2 years ago. Of that 800, 300 were kids applying from local private schools with tuition rates of $14K annually. Kids coming out of the math and science program routinely enter college as second semester freshman or first semester sophomores because of the almost entirely AP curriculum they go thru.

Originally Posted by OSECS

Not very very accurate. Plenty of public school systems in the country as good if not better than some private schools, esp. when considering private college prep schools cost $12K and up a year.

Key word being "some" private schools.

I have never heard of a public (non-charter) school where 100% of the students take the SAT's AND have a 2100 median. You can find those sorts of numbers at both Philips Andover and Philips Exeter. There are lots of other schools that are also pretty spectacular. There are schools where 40% of the grads are accepted at Ivy League level schools. At Exeter and Andover, the numbers are probably even higher.

I don't know that I have heard of a charter school with a 2100 median SAT. There could be one out there, I just don't know about it.

The idea that we could just privatize education and pretty soon every high school would be providing students with Exeter type educations is laughable.

Originally Posted by Long duc dong

Key word being "some" private schools.

I have never heard of a public (non-charter) school where 100% of the students take the SAT's AND have a 2100 median. You can find those sorts of numbers at both Philips Andover and Philips Exeter. There are lots of other schools that are also pretty spectacular. There are schools where 40% of the grads are accepted at Ivy League level schools. At Exeter and Andover, the numbers are probably even higher.

I don't know that I have heard of a charter school with a 2100 median SAT. There could be one out there, I just don't know about it.

The idea that we could just privatize education and pretty soon every high school would be providing students with Exeter type educations is laughable.

Of course not. Just using our area as an example. Yeah few public schools can compete with the super power privates, but there are a handful out there. And I don't advocate the privatization of public education.

Tuition to Exeter for the 2009–2010 school year is $41800 for boarding students and $32470 for day students.
Average class size: 12 students
Student to teacher ratio - 5:1

I prefer my Orange Juice sans apples, por favor.

Originally Posted by Long duc dong

Key word being "some" private schools.

I have never heard of a public (non-charter) school where 100% of the students take the SAT's AND have a 2100 median. You can find those sorts of numbers at both Philips Andover and Philips Exeter. There are lots of other schools that are also pretty spectacular. There are schools where 40% of the grads are accepted at Ivy League level schools. At Exeter and Andover, the numbers are probably even higher.

I don't know that I have heard of a charter school with a 2100 median SAT. There could be one out there, I just don't know about it.

The idea that we could just privatize education and pretty soon every high school would be providing students with Exeter type educations is laughable.

TJHSST - public school in suburban VA at one point had higher mean scores than Philips. Couple other publics around that are similar or better than Exeter. I'd point to the underlying demographics of the institutions (competitive middle, upper middle, and upper class parents who value education) and the schools being able to draw from a large student block.