Teaching News

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Virgil

Jon, read post #3 above in this thread. Where does all that money go?

---

that's a good question virgil. this was one of my grievances with the public system when i worked in it. Admin touches on a huge problem that i encountered first hand, the inflated cost of funding special education programs that are full of students who clearly can't handle it. armed with their whacky classification schemes, students are deemed "classified" or "504" and placed in mainstream classes under a doctrine of "inclusion" where they are assigned a permanent "teacher." this teacher is paid the same salary as a specialized subject teacher which they don't deserve because, as admin pointed out, all they do is baby sit, shadowing students from class to class. they are also required to assist and organize the student's homework, and in many cases i observed special ed teachers doing the homework for them while the student goofed off during his/her special ed period. additionally these wanna-be teachers have the luxury of NO lesson planning and little to no grading of tests/papers/homework. :alien:

many of the special ed teachers i worked with would have been special ed students themselves had the special ed program existed when they were going in school.


students classified as "504" basically meant that as a subject teacher i could NOT grade them under the same standard as a mainstream student. i also had to give them "extra time" and never once did i experience where the extra time amounted to an improvement in the student's grade or work product. a 'C' grade for a special ed student was the equivalent of an F grade for a mainstream kid. the sad fact is i never once met a special ed student with the skills to be in a regular class. when i approached the special ed team about it -- usually headed by a school psychiatrist -- to inform them that their student couldn't hack the work, they referred me to the classification file.

enough's enough, if parents want their children who are classified to go to a regular school, then they should have to earn being there or face attending an alternative school. they lower the quality of learning for students who meet the standard. the system needs to stop dumbing down.

a teacher needs to step up with the nerve and write a book that puts the special ed program on notice. Special ed students are not the same.

Thanks Jon. I do believe that teachers are under paid, but I bristle every time I hear politicians saying that more money needs to go to education. I got to believe the system can be more efficient. You may disagree with me, but I do believe that private competition (in the same way that colleges have both private and public) would do the system wonders.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Virgil

Thanks Jon. I do believe that teachers are under paid, but I bristle every time I hear politicians saying that more money needs to go to education. I got to believe the system can be more efficient. You may disagree with me, but I do believe that private competition (in the same way that colleges have both private and public) would do the system wonders.

---

not at all, i agree with you 100%. :thumbs_up that's a system in which teachers will be properly compensated based on merit, not union membership.

Here's an interesting article. What interrests me is not so much the general thrust of the article but the cost of educaton. It costs over $12,500 per student per year. This has been a long pet peeve of mine. What makes for such an exuberant cost? A typical class is around 30 students. $12,000 times 30 equals $360,000. A class is esentially one teacher. Now a teacher makes at most $80,000 and when you figure overhead (medical benefits, paid vacation, management, building and maitenence, supplies) that is typically 50% of the base salary, so it costs the employer $80,000 plus $40,000 to support a classroom. That's $120,000. Where does the rest of the money go? Every election year politicians keep saying that we need more money to educate our children. BUT WHERE DOES THE MONEY GO? Two thirds of it doesn't go directly to a classroom.


Interesting article, Virgil. I will note that there are some discrepancies... or rather some expenses that you have left out. The average class sizes vary greatly. Currently there is a movement toward smaller class sizes in the early elementary years, studies having found strong correlation between class size and student learning in the early years. Many schools stipulate a 15 or 20 to 1 ratio in 1st through 3rd grade. Of course, there are also situations (not uncommon) when teachers have 45, 50, or more students. But you cannot count the salaries of the classroom or homeroom teacher only. There are the subject area specialists (art, music, P.E., library, etc...). In high school you have all the various electives (foreign languages, wood shop, the arts, etc...) You also have the extracurricular activities (clubs, sports, band, etc...) Add to this the administrative costs (principals, secretaries, etc...) and operational maintenance and supplies (custodial, construction, electricians, plumbers, utilities, the costs of books, paper, xerox machines, instruments for band, equipment for sports, art supplies, etc...)

If we figure all of this in we must figure the salary and benefits of a teacher ($80,000) plus 1/5th of this to cover the subject area specialists (who the children go to while the teacher is on his or her planning periods) That adds a further $16,000. To this we must also add administrative costs. If we figure there is usually somewhere around 1 principal ($100,000) two custodians ($180,000) 2 cleaners ($60,000), four food service personnel ($60,000) and two secretaries ($60,000) for every 400 children this comes to approximately another $1200 per student. Add to this transportation costs, after school detentions, extracurricular activities, books, supplies, etc... and we start getting far closer to understanding the costs of maintaining and operating a school.

On the other hand... as Jon has suggested there is a hell of a lot of money wasted on special ed services... largely due to the federal government's inane (asinine) requirement that each child be taught in the "least restrictive environment". As a result the most in-demand position in the public schools today... and the fastest growing... is the special ed departments. Some of these Special Ed teachers truly earn their pay... teaching 12 or 15 children at 5 different grade levels and 15 different cognitive levels... but far too often we have Special Ed. teachers who have 8 or 4... or even just 2 students... and these students are mainstreamed into the regular classrooms with the regular classroom teacher who must deal with them... maintain discipline... but cannot grade them. Now and then the Special Ed. Instructional Aid will be there to help... but most of the time he or she is off making xerox copies for the Special Ed. teacher or making phone calls. Every now and then the Special Ed. teacher may pull 3 or 4 of his/her students aside for individualized instruction... but far too often these students are left to the classroom teachers... and to the subject area specialists who get no assistance in dealing with their behavior or their needs. Add to this the fact that in any given classroom you might find 2 or 3 or 5 other students who should/could be classified as "special ed." (being just as low academically or as disruptive as the behavioral disabled) and you will understand why a lot of teachers aren't overly fond of the whole "Special Ed." Department crap... and suspect it is just one vast waste of money.

not at all, i agree with you 100%. that's a system in which teachers will be properly compensated based on merit, not union membership.

Again... the problem is how do you measure a teacher's "effectiveness". The week before we broke for winter break a well-off suburban school took us on as a partner... with the students raising money to buy coats and sweaters for our kids. Several principals, a superintendent, and a number of teachers came to our school. The one principal came from the most poverty-ridden school in his district. 24% of his students met the federal poverty guidelines required for them to be provided a free breakfast. He was shocked to discover that 100% or our students qualify. His school district has easily met AYP (average yearly progress under NCLB)... but my building has failed to do so for the last 3 years. I have no doubt, however, that if we were to switch places with the teachers from that school, half of them would quit before the year was out (many the first time a 6-foot 8th grader got in their face, threw a chair across the room or called them an "M...F...er"). Few would find it at all possible to teach anything... let alone meet the required yearly progress.

How do you measure the ability or effectiveness of a teacher when the teachers in some districts have students with educated, well-off parents who support the schools and education... who work with their children at home... who provide them with computers and books and learning experiences such as trips to the zoo or the orchestra or the museums... who set examples by reading at home themselves... by talking about how important education is... while other schools have students whose parents live in poverty... who walk to school everyday past hookers, gangs, drug dealers, and crack heads... whose only guaranteed meals are those provided by the schools... whose only experience of structure and continuity is provided by the schools... who enter their given grade 3 or 4 grade levels behind in ability and lacking any outside learning experiences outside that provided on the streets or in the R and X-rated films their parents let them watch?

A-level candidates will soon be able to choose some of the books they want to study for their English course. Teachers must approve the texts, which the OCR exam board says will have to be "of sufficient substance".

Any three works of poetry or prose can be used for its "texts in time" module, a 3,000-word coursework essay that is worth 20% of the final A-level marks.

Another module, literature post-1900, also allows three free choices though one must be from after 1990.

OCR's director of qualifications, Clara Kenyon, said the changes - which come into effect in September - should help to enthuse youngsters about the subject.

"The public has a real enthusiasm for literature, as shown by the popularity of initiatives such as Richard and Judy's Book Club which have been hugely successful," she said.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7230754.stm

It is time to revamp some of the curriculum for the boys. College enrollment is increasingly female dominated. Most of the lads are being taught by all females through 5th or 6th grades. Fiction is the genre of choice for most females. Males much prefer non-fiction. Columbia university in NYC seems to be ahead of the curve in their reading and writing workshop approach.

Pupils are being rewarded for writing obscenities in their GCSE English examinations even when it has nothing to do with the question.

One pupil who wrote “f*** off” was given marks for accurate spelling and conveying a meaning successfully.

His paper was marked by Peter Buckroyd, a chief examiner who has instructed fellow examiners to mark in the same way. He told trainee examiners recently to adhere strictly to the mark scheme, to the extent that pupils who wrote only expletives on their papers should be awarded points.

Mr Buckroyd, chief examiner of English for the Assessment and Qualifications Alliance (AQA), an examination board, said that he had given the pupil two marks, out of a possible 27, for the expletive.

To gain minimum marks in English, students must demonstrate “some simple sequencing of ideas” and “some words in appropriate order”. The phrase had achieved this, according to Mr Buckroyd.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/lif...cle4237491.ece

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scheherazade

Pupils are being rewarded for writing obscenities in their GCSE English examinations even when it has nothing to do with the question.

One pupil who wrote “f*** off” was given marks for accurate spelling and conveying a meaning successfully.

His paper was marked by Peter Buckroyd, a chief examiner who has instructed fellow examiners to mark in the same way. He told trainee examiners recently to adhere strictly to the mark scheme, to the extent that pupils who wrote only expletives on their papers should be awarded points.

Mr Buckroyd, chief examiner of English for the Assessment and Qualifications Alliance (AQA), an examination board, said that he had given the pupil two marks, out of a possible 27, for the expletive.

To gain minimum marks in English, students must demonstrate “some simple sequencing of ideas” and “some words in appropriate order”. The phrase had achieved this, according to Mr Buckroyd.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/lif...cle4237491.ece

---

Oh my God. What has this world come to? This just infuriates my conservative heart. :flare: Unreal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scheherazade

Pupils are being rewarded for writing obscenities in their GCSE English examinations even when it has nothing to do with the question.

One pupil who wrote “f*** off” was given marks for accurate spelling and conveying a meaning successfully.

His paper was marked by Peter Buckroyd, a chief examiner who has instructed fellow examiners to mark in the same way. He told trainee examiners recently to adhere strictly to the mark scheme, to the extent that pupils who wrote only expletives on their papers should be awarded points.

Mr Buckroyd, chief examiner of English for the Assessment and Qualifications Alliance (AQA), an examination board, said that he had given the pupil two marks, out of a possible 27, for the expletive.

To gain minimum marks in English, students must demonstrate “some simple sequencing of ideas” and “some words in appropriate order”. The phrase had achieved this, according to Mr Buckroyd.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/lif...cle4237491.ece

---

That is truly disturbing:flare: Why would you reward someone in the school system for being intentionally disrespectful? That is more or less what I see this as. A child can write any amount of unacceptable language, and they'll get credit for proper usage and spelling???? What exactly is the education system thinking?

Primary school children as young as five are to be given an early insight into the work of William Shakespeare.

A government initiative will see schools in England being sent a support package including DVDs of adaptations of his plays in its original language.

Guidance in the form of a booklet called Shakespeare For All Ages and Stages will be sent to all schools.

Schools minister Jim Knight said the Bard's work should be enjoyed as much as possible from a young age.

The booklet includes tips on bringing the writing of Shakespeare alive for children from the age of five to 16.

And pupils in some secondary schools will get the chance of seeing a live Shakespeare performance.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7490360.stm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scheherazade

Primary school children as young as five are to be given an early insight into the work of William Shakespeare.

A government initiative will see schools in England being sent a support package including DVDs of adaptations of his plays in its original language.

Guidance in the form of a booklet called Shakespeare For All Ages and Stages will be sent to all schools.

Schools minister Jim Knight said the Bard's work should be enjoyed as much as possible from a young age.

The booklet includes tips on bringing the writing of Shakespeare alive for children from the age of five to 16.

And pupils in some secondary schools will get the chance of seeing a live Shakespeare performance.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7490360.stm

---

HA! I was going to post this in the news thread, you beat me to it scher :nod:
In principle I dont think its a bad idea my sister did Macbeth at school when she was 7 and for weeks was lugging around the Oxford ( or was it kingfisher) stories from Shakespeare because she LOVED it that much. The rest of us got rather sick f hearing about it though. :rolleyes: :lol:

But it sort of goes hand in hand with idea of teaching primary school kids philosophy and thinking skills doesnt it?

Poor reading and writing skills among graduates are a concern for half of the UK's top employers, a survey suggests.

The Association of Graduate Recruiters found 56% of the 200 firms surveyed had concerns about a lack of "hard skills" like literacy and leadership.

The survey found employers were also less likely to trust degree grades as "gold standards" for recruitment.

It also found starting salaries were not keeping up with inflation but that there were more graduate vacancies.

This annual survey reflects the type of labour market facing graduates - and this year shows a mixed picture of continued growth tinged with a growing uncertainty over earnings.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7494172.stm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Virgil

Oh my God. What has this world come to? This just infuriates my conservative heart. :flare: Unreal.

---

You don't need to be conservative to be infuriated. :p I find this totally unbelievable too. I had already read something similar a while ago and some people thought it was false when I told them! (which is understandable!) That is just crazy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scheherazade

Poor reading and writing skills among graduates are a concern for half of the UK's top employers, a survey suggests.

The Association of Graduate Recruiters found 56% of the 200 firms surveyed had concerns about a lack of "hard skills" like literacy and leadership.

The survey found employers were also less likely to trust degree grades as "gold standards" for recruitment.

It also found starting salaries were not keeping up with inflation but that there were more graduate vacancies.

This annual survey reflects the type of labour market facing graduates - and this year shows a mixed picture of continued growth tinged with a growing uncertainty over earnings.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7494172.stm

---

Which links nicly into my current RL rant which is information literacy and how it si a basic skill in todays world that people are shockingly lacking in!
:nod:

A Norfolk headteacher has said there have been no exclusions from his school since he started rewarding pupils with chocolate for good behaviour.

Dr Andrew Sheppard began the scheme in 2005, since when exclusion days at Redcastle Furze Primary in Thetford have dropped from 65 a year to zero.

Critics said he was contributing to childhood obesity and dental problems.

But Dr Sheppard said: "It has improved behaviour, they are polite and... they have a sense of responsibility."

In September 2005, Dr Sheppard pledged to give all 240 pupils a bar of chocolate if they made it to the half time break without any exclusions.

The scheme proved so successful it was extended term by term. Since then discos, picnics and Easter eggs have been handed out.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/norfolk/7513320.stm