Two unrelated articles show how the education of children comes last when dealing with the government education bureaucracy and the labor unions representing teachers. In San Diego, the unions and the district struck a deal yesterday to avoid 1,481 layoffs, according to the U-T.
Representing 7,000 teachers, the San Diego Education Association agreed to extend furloughs for a third and fourth year — once again shortening the school year for 118,000 students and cutting pay for educators.
The preliminary agreement includes a one-time financial retirement incentive in an effort to nudge the most senior teachers off the payroll this year. It also lays the groundwork for shaving 14 more days off the 2012-13 academic year should Gov. Jerry Brown’s tax-hike initiative fail in the November election.
This is no bargain for children’s education. The teachers are getting paid less because they are working less. Further, we don’t know how many of the jobs saved are teacher positions. We could continue this trend and have children have zero days of school but still end up with a huge tab from the government school system. Neither the district nor the union have the courage to address the real problem, the large number of non-teachers on the payroll in the form of administrators. My research from 2010 showed that the ratio of teachers to other staff in San Diego schools was about 1.25 to 1. Chicago Catholic Schools have a ratio closer to 7 to 1. The reason we don’t get much for our education dollar is the huge number of non-teaching staff members. Further, reducing the number of days in school reduces learning for children as is documented in Malcolm Gladwell’s book, The Outliers. The government and the unions seem intent on rigging the education system against children.
Meanwhile in New York, Governor Cuomo is ready to sign EMERGENCY legislation to prevent government teacher’s evaluation scores from becoming public knowledge, in spite of the fact that they are paid by the public.
Cuomo and the state’s powerful teachers’ unions have tried to limit the evaluations’ release to parents of children in a teacher’s class, without further dissemination. The bill also would prevent parents from seeing the evaluations of teachers they might want to avoid in future years, which could be more useful to parents than seeing an evaluation of their child’s current teacher, who they can’t change.
Of course they can’t. Unions want to protect poorly performing teachers from the consequences of their performance. Parental involvement in education improves childhood learning; but the government school system is rigged to deny parents meaningful influence. But any attempt to give parents a voice in the system will be vigorously opposed by the government employees unions.
I think widespread vouchers and privatization of the government run school system is the fastest way to fix education in the United States. But government run schools can work. In San Diego, we often hear of the Poway school system being highly desirable. In San Francisco, a series of reforms that give parents more choice and principals more authority, including budgeting and hiring, has greatly improved schools there. San Diego schools could vastly improve, by imitating reforms that have worked elsewhere and reducing non-teaching staff size.
Comments 10
I agree with much of what you say and support vouchers and public teacher evaluation.. But I don’t believe you have examined the core problems of public education. Their are too few good schools for vouchers to work currently and we have abandoned the neighborhood school model for choice and diversity. Also, I believe the unions are a much bigger problem then the teachers.
First, parents that want to know the quality of teachers can find this information from other involved parents, frequent opportunities to volunteer and observe at the school, classroom visits, and communication with school principals. In fact, I was able to work with the principal and select my daughters second grade teacher. I would not trust my child to just a school district run evaluation.
Second, the Poway school results strongly indicate the students and the parents matter for educational results. IMO, it is a mistake to think better administrators means better results. Parents that make poor individual choices, make poor choices for their children. Illegal immigration affects not only the results of the immigrant but also adversely affects the learning environment, funding, and synergies of the whole school.
Finally, the best and brightest students are be harmed by current theories in education. Every child should receive and appropriate education. Mixed skilled student classes only help the teachers. Mixing high performing students with low performing students harms the progress of the better students and offers little evidence of help to those who struggle. Dumbing down the schools, focusing on the achievement gap rather than merit, and funding busing and food programs rather than education are also issues that must be examined.
Although I have a different slant on the schools, I did like your views and post.
“There are too few good schools for vouchers to work currently”
Break up the government-sponsored monopoly and watch how many competitors flood the market. Quality will improve and costs will drop.
In 1983, my phone bill was about $250/month for one line. I had to pay ridiculous interstate charges to call my parents, 40 miles away, from my dorm room. Of course, I had no choice because ATT was a government-sponsored monopoly.
Today, my wife and I carry supercomputers in our pocket, can make unlimited free calls in the contiguous 48 states on them, sent unlimited text messages, manage our calendars, shop and pay for groceries on them, etc, etc, all for about $250/month.
While vouchers would distort prices (tuition tax credits would be better), it’s a good start.
I suspect the ideas you have RDB would make you an excellent educational entrepreneur. I hope you get wildly wealthy by implementing them if we introduce competition to education
RDB raises a common objection to vouchers — there aren’t enough private schools. But there are — if you measure current supply and demand.
Not many choose to pay for private schools, when they are ALREADY paying for their “free” public schools, and don’t choose to (or can’t) double pay. Change that demand level with vouchers or (better yet) tax credits, and watch the supply of private schools grow.
RDB is making the common economic error — “static analysis.” Change one variable, and expect the other variables to remain constant. Folks advocating raising taxes commonly employ this flawed analysis.
To avoid a temporary supply-demand log jam, one can phase in vouchers/tax credits over a, say, four year period. The IMPORTANT feature must be a PREDICTABLE phase-in, so that education suppliers can make appropriate investments and preparations.
As to available school sites — one likely option is to use EXISTING public schools no longer needed. Not theory — SDUSD has rented out empty schools to private schools (Horizon, for instance).
To find good teachers, seek educators from among the laid off public school teachers. And you don’t have to pick your teachers by SENIORITY! Nor do you have to offer what amounts to lifetime tenure.
The other underappreciated benefit of vouchers is that suddenly PUBLIC schools will improve. Florida discovered that fact recently — when schools that scored “F” two years running had to offer vouchers to its students. The DRAMATIC change in the public employee mindset at such schools was nothing less than stunning.
“Break up the government-sponsored monopoly and watch how many competitors flood the market. Quality will improve and costs will drop.”
Brian, I agree completely. Vouchers are the good first step of parent responsibility for their students education. IMO, I am responsible for my child’s education; and vouchers, good teachers, and the schools are my tools.
I have been rewarded for my parent involvement with a son who will be entering Berkeley as a sophomore (after AP, JC classes at PLHS) majoring in physics and economics.
Coincidentally I did my weekly XETV-6 Morning News segment today on this very topic — SDUSD, and alternatives. Fun gig.
http://www.sandiego6.com/news/sd6-in-the-morning/Tentative-School-Budget-Agreement–159876325.html
Mr. Rider, I agree that vouchers would eventually yield many more good schools and did not mean it to be an argument to oppose vouchers. Also, I like your idea of phasing in vouchers to prevent temporary disruptions.
But I will repeat my belief that vouchers and teacher evaluations should not be viewed as the end of parental involvement, only the start of parents taking control and responsibility.
“I have been rewarded for my parent involvement with a son who will be entering Berkeley as a sophomore (after AP, JC classes at PLHS) majoring in physics and economics.”
Start a school. I’m not joking and I hope you become fabulously wealthy by improving quality and reducing costs.
RDB, vouchers are the BEGINNING of parental involvement (not the end) — taking charge of the quality and direction of their children’s education.
Too often parents feel powerless in assigned public schools (they are NOT powerless, but that’s often the perception). With vouchers, the parents not only have to seek out the best choice, but with private schools are usually REQUIRED by the school to get more involved in both the schools and the education of their kids.
BTW, my wife was a career public school teacher, and we sent our two boys to both public and private schools, depending on what was best for our kids. We could do that financially, but the people who most need such options (typically blue collar urban families) are the one’s who are at the mercy of the government school monopoly.
Author
Why don’t we try key reforms like in San Francisco. Principals have a large degree of autonomy and compete for students. Even if less than perfectly optimum, it would get the public used to choice and pave the way for more vouchers. It could be sold initially as a way to save the public system. Waiting for the current system to implode, our current path, seems immoral as our kids are collateral damage. I also agree that parental involvement makes all the difference. Malcolm Gladwell points this out in his book. So we have to ask ourselves how to maximize that behavior, but accept that there are limits.
A teacher in a U-T letter to the editor today cited socialist Sweden as a fine example of spending “enough” on education. She didn’t do her homework.
For almost two decades Sweden has had a FULL voucher system. Parents pick where the education money for their kids goes — government or private schools.
What is interesting is that no one in Sweden today thinks this option is a big deal — just sensible choice. I posted a column on this here before.
http://sdrostra.com/?p=12488