Obama: Schools can improve with right incentives

[Freddie Stubbs]

Source: Associated Press

WASHINGTON -- Trying to make his case for overhauling the nation's education laws, President Barack Obama is highlighting progress at a Tennessee high school as evidence that the proper incentives can help all schools succeed.

Obama focused his weekly radio and Internet address Saturday on Memphis' Booker T. Washington High School, where the president delivered the commencement address Monday.

Graduation rates at the school, which is in a poor, crime-ridden neighborhood, have risen impressively in just three years. The school won a national competition to secure him as its speaker by demonstrating how it overcame challenges through innovations such as separate freshman academies for boys and girls.

"Booker T. Washington High School is no longer a story about what's gone wrong in education," the president said. "It's a story about how we can set it right.

Read more: http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/05/21/2227356/obama-pushes-education-overhaul.html

[MannyGoldstein]

1. Massachusetts has the best public school outcomes by far

So if ObamaDuncan were interested in success, they'd have copied Massachusetts, rather than foisting an untried experiment on the country. But that wouldn't include busting teacher unions.

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MannyGoldstein]

4. Do you disagree with anything I've written?

If not, than whose post is suspicious, yours or mine?

[joeglow3]

10. Show me the evidence

By evidence, I mean show me socio-economic and racial comparisons between the districts you are referencing.

[MannyGoldstein]

12. Sure. As long as you commit to doing the same for

The ObamaDuncan plan.

[JackRiddler]

14. Patently false characterization of a post as "anti-Obama" above. Let's count them.

They appear with regularity. Suspicious, to say the least.

Are you capable of hearing a critique of a policy without forcing it into a "pro" or "anti" Obama box?

All political people need to get over rigid categories, false dichotomies and "follow the leader" nonsense.

[DissedByBush]

5. You don't need to bust the teacher's unions

You just need them to be a partner in helping education.

The problem comes when they are on the side of teachers and opposed to the kids.

I remember a while back when one fought against bonuses for outstanding performance for teachers.

Nope, all teachers at the same point of the scale should be paid the same regardless of performance according to the union.

That is wrong.

[proud2BlibKansan]

13. No it's not wrong

Most teachers don't want performance pay. Why force it?

[DissedByBush]

15. Opposed to more money for doing a good job

Instead of wanting that, they want to make sure nobody gets rewarded for doing a good job.

Logically that means they don't want incentive for doing a good job.

Thus they don't want anybody doing a good job, everybody is encouraged to be mediocre.

If they are not for bonuses, they are part of the problem and need to go too.

[DissedByBush]

16. Opposed to more money for doing a good job

Instead of wanting that, they want to make sure nobody gets rewarded for doing a good job.

Logically that means they don't want incentive for doing a good job.

Thus they don't want anybody doing a good job, everybody is encouraged to be mediocre.

If they are not for bonuses, they are part of the problem and need to go too.

[proud2BlibKansan]

17. What a pile of hooey

Teachers don't become teachers because they want cash incentives. The rewards are in the growth of the children and the blessing of being a part of that growth.

One of my co-workers was just recognized for starting an after school tutoring program on her dime and for no pay. That's not uncommon. You obviously don't understand the teaching culture or you wouldn't be making such ridiculously out of touch statements.

[DissedByBush]

18. Teachers become teachers for a variety of reasons

Pure altruism is probably a small percentage.

Extra pay is recognition for good work.

Everybody likes recognition for good work, unless they have ulterior motives.

Such as protecting those who don't do good work.

[proud2BlibKansan]

19. Are you a teacher?

[DissedByBush]

20. No, but I know a lot of them

Both through my kids' school and through my grandmother who was a negotiator in the schools for over 30 years.

And if they DON"T do it for the money, why do they get mad when people talk about pay decreases, freezes and making them pay for some of their healthcare?

What was the whole Walker thing about if they don't care at all about money?

Bullshit, they do care about money.

So if they oppose merit bonuses it can only be because they DON'T want to be judged on merit.

The only reason to not want to be judged on merit is to protect those who have no merit.

[proud2BlibKansan]

22. Then stop speaking for us.

No you don't know. You don't teach. How dare you speak for those of us who do.

The "Walker thing" was about TAKING MONEY AWAY from workers, which is completely different from pay for performance.

The rest of your erroneous drivel is not worthy of further comment.

[DissedByBush]

26. So it was about taking money away

Not all altruism, huh?

The unions who were against merit bonuses took money away from high-performing teachers.

You don't seem to mind.

In fact, you are defending them.

You are defending "TAKING MONEY AWAY" from teachers.

Sounds like you're part of the problem, not the solution.

[kwassa]

33. The problems with merit pay ...

It is hard to measure merit in teaching accurately. Many of the assessments of teacher performance are either very subjective, or no measures currently exist to measure them at all, outside of administrator observations.

Teachers rightly fear that they will be held accountable for factors over which they have no control, such as lack of parental support for education in the home, and the impact of poverty and instability in the student's life. Any teacher has a student for only a small part of the day, relative to the parent's potential time with the child. The responsibility for overseeing the total education of the child lies with the parents. Teachers assist in that, but they can never take over that responsibility.

A teacher may have a great impact on the student's life, but that influence may not be seen for a long time after the student leaves that particular teacher, and wouldn't show up in any measure.

The false reform movement in education now is the attempt to apply business models to a non-business environment. Businesses can fire workers for not performing; a teacher can't fire a student for the same thing, and therefore doesn't have the type of control over the worker output that a business would. Most of the money in the so-called reform movement comes from rich business owners such as Bill Gates and Eli Broad, who mistakenly believe that a business model can be used.

What will finally make a difference is identifying and utilizing best practices in teaching, and that knowledge comes from educators, the vast majority who are completely excluded from this "reform" movement. I would point out that the reformers themselves have no actual educational ideas about HOW to reform education; they simply want to make the teachers figure that out for them by offering them higher pay for doing so. Figuring out how to do it in a high-poverty environment on a cost-acceptable basis has defied almost everyone.

[alp227]

35. +1000000! Got it right there.

Of course, there are teachers out there who've hurt students and done other vile or incompetent things, and they shall be dealt with appropriately. But never mind all the hardworking, dedicated ones who are confronted with the realities of society beyond their control! Those reformers are usually rich people fronting who've never probably spent a damn second in the classroom. Hell, at least George W. Bush did especially when reading the Pet Goat book.

[DissedByBush]

38. All the teachers in a school have the same circumstances

On average, same default parental involvement, same economics, etc.

The ones who do better are better teachers.

They deserve rewards.

Or they don't, from the union point of view.

[kwassa]

40. You are wrong to make that assumption.

My school, and many others, has students from a wide variety of backgrounds and income levels. We have students that are essentially homeless, with housing vouchers to keep them in apartments, and students that live in mansions.

Frankly, I think you know little about the current state of American education.

Read this:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/five-myths-about-americas-schools/2011/05/09/AFunW27G_story.html

Five myths about America’s schools

2. Unions defend bad teachers.

Unions have proved amenable to removing the bad apples in their ranks — with due process. Montgomery County, for instance, implemented its Peer Assistance and Review program with union cooperation a decade ago. It requires every new teacher and those flagged as “underperforming” by a principal to be observed by a specialist over a school year. All teachers get support, advice and a chance to do better; then they are reevaluated.Those who fall short lose their jobs. Between 2006 and 2010, 245 teachers resigned or were dismissed. Many districts have similar programs, but, as a Harvard study pointed out, they are expensive.

Reformers who attack unions for school problems should mind their logic: Some school systems show better results than others, yet most have teachers’ unions. If unions are universally problematic, why are some students succeeding while others languish?

[DissedByBush]

41. So you have one teacher who gets all the rich kids?

All the other teachers in that school get the poor kids?

I've never seen it work that way.

About the unions, you assume they are all the same. The news is rife with teachers paid to do nothing for years while their case wends through the system, costing the district over a hundred thousand dollars per. Other cases they just buy-off the teacher.

I understand protection from wrongful firing, but this goes far over the line into protecting poor and even downright dangerous teachers.

Don't forget about unions: They are organizations made of people. They are also a nexus of power and money.

Fallable people plus power and money is a breeding ground for corruption and self-serving attitudes.

Just look at Congress. Unions aren't immune just because they're called "unions."

And what was that famous quote from the founder of the UFT?

"When school children start paying union dues, that's when I'll start representing the interests of school children."

People paint this as teachers and unions vs. the conservatives.

It's not so one-dimensional.

Don't forget the unions vs. students angle.

Whose side are you on when it comes to that?

[la la]

23. one of the reasons--

speaking as a 'retired' teacher--and one who was involved with her students, her local union and her state and national union---is the question-'Who is going to be the judge of these teachers and what will the 'requirements' be?'

...for example- Many (yes, many) administrators have personal problems with teachers, having nothing to do with what they're teaching- how they're teaching, etc.---how would that work out for the teacher?

[DissedByBush]

27. Specifics of implemention

They were against the very concept of it regardless of implementation.

All teachers should be paid equally regardless of performance.

That's the idea.

And it's one of the problems in our system.

[la la]

29. who is/are *they* ?

sounds a bit 'socialistic' to me!

just kidding

kind of................

[joeglow3]

28. That is not unique to teaching

Having been in both environments, I prefered merit based pay. However, it is probably because I always got the top ratings.

[la la]

30. the difference is...

so to speak--the 'product' - our students. other 'environments' usually have givens- expectations of an end product. that doesn't always happen with students, as i'm sure you know.

[joeglow3]

32. Yes and no.

If you rely solely on test scores or "objective" scores, I agree. However, I would expect a good principal to be capable of viewing teachers and knowing which are good and which are poor. Additionally, there ARE people trained to analyze teachers. For instance, our school has a 4th grade teacher that is TERRIBLE and everyone knows it. A coworker of mine has a daughter who had this teacher 2 years ago. He ended up spending thousands on a tutor, who also sat in the class and said the teacher was horrible. She volunteered her time to help the teacher and the teacher effectively told her to piss off. While this is clearly anecdotal, their school is clearly set up where this kind of an issue can fester.

[la la]

36. where is the administration in this issue?

..as i've stated- administrators are not always able to tell which teachers are good and which need help- and how to help them help themselves.
while your anecdotal is surely true--it just reaffirms what i mentioned earlier---

a. administrators cannot all be relied on to judge and follow thru - i've seen many 'in action'!
b. each child/product/client is different and each finished 'product' cannot always be successful

( i hate calling kids 'products'---but that's what is now expected, by conservatives, teacher-haters and apparently duncan and - lordy, lordy---Obama--;>( )

after all this, i do agree that there needs to be some set-up for ridding the system of poor teachers--but after all these years- i still don't have an answer that satisfies me.

[DissedByBush]

37. They could be afraid

It can take years and hundreds of thousands of dollars to rid a district of a bad teacher.

Sometimes it's easier to just let that teacher continue to hurt the kids.

Or they just ship the teacher off to some other school, passing the problem along.

For some reason most other industries have the ability to fire poor performers, and are able to deal with the problem of vengeful management.

But nope, not in schools.

We have to protect the poor performing teachers, and that includes making sure they don't get paid less than the high performing ones.

[joeglow3]

39. Along those lines

We had a Boy Scout accidently bring his pocket knife to school and he was suspended under the zero tolerance policy. This same distict had a teacher offering sexual favors for grades and they are giving all time in the world before going to the police:

http://www.wowt.com/home/headlines/Allegations_Against_Former_Teacher_Detailed_122204584.html

[JustAmused]

31. LOL

Sorry, but you are absolutely wrong. I come from a family of educators going back three generations. I won't explain since you could not possibly understand. Teachers are not like stock brokers and do not need "incentives" to do very good job.

[femmocrat]

24. What would be the criteria for awarding such bonuses?

Define "outstanding performance," please? Are you basing this system on student performance?

If so, please be informed that "merit pay" does not increase student performance.

Here is a link to the often-cited study by Vanderbilt University that made this conclusion:

http://neatoday.org/2010/09/21/new-study-merit-pay-does-not-boost-student-achievement/

Interesting that this study took place in the Nashville public schools. There are a lot more articles on the NEA website explaining why merit pay just doesn't work. Granted, the NEA has a stake in preserving the status quo, but one must admit that they are also professional educators who are well-informed on current issues.

[dkf]

25. What made me upset is when we had to add furlough days and the teacher's union

Refused to turn any of 6 paid non instructional days into instructional days for the year.

That was when I realized that the unions are more interested in teachers benefits and perks than students.

[kwassa]

34. What were the 6 paid days?

We get five days to set up rooms, hold strategy meetings, etc. before the beginning of the school year, but these are quite necessary. There are also days for preparing the quarterly report cards. We can't teach and do these things at the same time.

I would point out that many of the highest performing school systems are ones with teacher unions.

[FarLeftFist]

6. Who are you voting for in 2012?

[MannyGoldstein]

7. For whover best represents Democratic values.

How about you?

[FarLeftFist]

8. Me? I'm voting straight down party lines.

[Demeter]

3. Maybe Wheat Can Sprout on a Tabletop, But Don't Expect a Good Harvest

Education takes people who care, and who get paid enough that they have the luxury and space in their lives to care.

Get back to me when the people are put back in the equation.

[LiberalFighter]

9. As long as Obama has Arne Duncan or anyone else that endorses charter schools

he doesn't know diddly squat about education.

[DumpDavisHogg]

11. As long as he doesn't endorse school uniforms

That idea should have been left back in 1996 when Clinton became obsessed with it.

[Igel]

21. I don't know about BTW.

I looked on their website and the Memphis schools' site, and didn't find the data that I thought NCLB required. Then again, BTW is still under a restructuring plan, it's that bad.

One thing I didn't like was the failing grades policy. There's hoop after hoop to fail a student. As one ed consultant would put it, failing a kid is "expensive" for the teacher. Fail 10 kids and you're filing a dozen different forms, over the course of a month or two, with various interviews and reports--any of which the principal or her delegate can kick back to you with a note saying, "No, you need to give him another chance" or "you need to make sure he gets tutoring."

Given that, I'd have to work really hard to fail a student--and given the various monitoring duties, Prof. Dev. requirements, Wed. afternoon meeting, and other time commitments, I'm not sure I'd want to work that hard. "Fine, Alice, because I don't have the 15 hours of spare time that I'd need to fail you, that 33/100 for your final score is adjusted to 75/100, congratulations, you pass and my pass rate goes up a bit. Win-win. Now go away."

I do like the parental involvement policy and the stepped and virtually mandatory discipline policy. I saw it in place in one school I observed in for a few weeks. The result was to dispose of some of the lowest performing students--after a lot of on-campus suspension and detention, after contacting the parents and dragging them in to school, a lot of them simply dropped out, if they were 18, or their parents moved them to simply reduce the headache that the school had become. Either way, the graduation rate increased since *fewer seniors failed* and were retained. With every dropout, the principal all but yelled "goooooooooooaaaaaaaaaal!" He'd been hired a few years ago to increase the graduation rate. (This may be anecdotal, but it's also research based: studies have found that often schools with the biggest improvements that start from really low achievement levels are those that shed students. No, public schools *don't* have to cheerfully take all comers. Texas charter schools are often wastelands, where failures go to reach 18 and drop out without dinging the school districts' ratings.)