You get what you pay for- simple as that. There are obviously inequities (as every single public, private organization has) but we have some of the best schools in the nation. Admit it Gus and the like- excellent schools. Go ahead- tear them down, lay off the teachers, cut the pay.

School are a function of the student population. The performance of individual students is closely correlated to several factors.

1. Education and income levels.
2. Value of Education of parents
3. Amount of reading, availability of books in the household.
4. Amount of time spent watching Television.

You see six figure retirements for school administrators in there.

Show me a direct correlation between

1. Teacher Salary and student performance.

2. Dollar spent per student and student performance.

3. Class size and student performance.

4. Number of administrators and student performance.


By direct I mean teachers getting paid ten percent more will have students with higher test scores than those being paid less.

In thirty years we have dramatically increased teacher salaries, teacher benefits. We have cut class size.

Can you show me a similar increase in student performance.

Good luck with that guys- look it up yourself.

quote:

Originally posted by taxpayer:
Show me a direct correlation between

1. Teacher Salary and student performance.
3. Class size and student performance.

Not that I'm disagreeing with you guys....in fact, I agree with what D87Parent said earlier about the ridiculous spending habits.

BUT, is it really a stretch to think that a teacher who feels underpaid compared to others with the same qualifications might not be motivated to do as good of a job? Or that a child sitting in a room with 40 other students would have a more difficult time paying attention than one in a room with only 20 others? I think basic logic dictates an argument for both of those statements....

quote:

Originally posted by taxpayer:
Show me a direct correlation between...

Taxpayer,

I agree with almost all that you have asserted, but that is not the point.

Show me how to raise our D41 parent’s education levels and I’ll vote for it. Show me how to raise the community income levels, and I’ll vote for that as well.
Also, class size does correlate with student performance (we can get into Venn diagrams here and what factor drives a more significant percentage… not the point). The real questions here is, can we do it?

Correlation is not causation.

The question that we need to discuss is what do we have control over that can effect positive change. A good example here is the quality of the teacher. A good/great teacher has a better chance of producing a good/great student (I hope that we can all agree on that). A poor, or unmotivated, or untrained, or unprepared, or unsupported, etc… teacher does not. However the system gives us few avenues to make changes in that area – unions and tenure.

We spend countless hours posting about what correlates and what doesn’t, but what can we control today, and what can we gain control over tomorrow?

Yes, we should look for fair and viable ways to reward our high performers and get rid of the rest – but that does not look to be available to us today. I have yet to sse a successful company that doesn’t preach about wanting to attract and maintain quality personnel.

And yes, we should look to change the long term compensation structure of the unions that appear to be an unsustainable model (see other industries). But that cannot be done now and will not change today.

Today, we can control class size. We can control the availability aides and specialists to provide support. We can control the tools that are teachers are given. And we should push the administration to cut the fat and waste and pay for it.

Its baseball opening season week, so I'll close with a comment that a prior manager once gave me as advice: Everybody loves homeruns, but you fill your batting average with singles, doubles and triples.

We should look for and promote large long range change, but we should also take the smaller steps to insure that the children in the system today are not fed leftovers while we shop for the steak.

NEVER thought I'd say this....but SoF is right

My point is that spending more money has not done us any good now has it.

We've tripled the amount we spend on education with not much of an increase in test scores or anything else for that matter.

There is no optimum class size. There is no magic number. Where you have X number of kids you will get a standard of performance.

Since as you say SOF we have no way of rewarding great performers and getting rid of poor ones. We are essentially just throwing our money away.

What is the point, more money to more mediocre teachers.

You tell me a good performing school and I will almost guarantee you what its demographics are like.

High income, high educated parents produce successful students.

If you took the teachers from D87 and moved them to the South side of Chicago you think there would be a jump in
performance.

What you say is lets spend more and more money despite the fact that it hasn't worked in the past. That is totally illogical.

D41 after ripping us off back in 2001 went out and hired more aids more administrators has there been any improvement in D41 since then.

Run for school board TP.

TP, ever hear of Jaime Escalante? And how prejudice can blind a person to performance? Because, obviously, no students from an urban area or without highly educated parents can succeed academically.

philly.com...

FWIW, grew up on the northwest side, CPS high school, first person in my family to enter college - Loyola Chicago handed me one for my SAT scores way back in the day. Graduated magnum cum laude. And, yes, I was initially intimidated by the kids from the 'tony' burbs - guess what, not all of them were so bright. I did envy them the resources they'd had in high school, though.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Ted E.,

quote:

Originally posted by taxpayer:
You tell me a good performing school and I will almost guarantee you what its demographics are like... High income, high educated parents produce successful students.

I am not sure I get your point here. Are you trying to say that we should create a society that only tolerates high income, highly educated population of a similar demographic? I am not trying to put words in your mouth/post, but I have to say that I respectfully do not believe this type of social engineering has been met with positive feedback in the past. Is this an Orwellian reference or something else?

quote:

Originally posted by taxpayer:
What you say is lets spend more and more money despite the fact that it hasn't worked in the past.

That is obviously not what I said.

But, let’s suspend belief and imagine that was my point. Can you actually provide evidence that the spending of money has not worked? Regrettably, WE cannot prove such a premise (notice my use of we in an effort to adjoin myself to your frustration). The variables of time, teachers, school crowding, student counts, class size, curriculum, student/parent demographics, etc. are all variables that are not held constant in any comparison. We do not know the results of a 2001 do nothing plan. Same as we do not know why students grades in portable classrooms performed poorer on MAP scores than students under brick and mortar last year (That is true, but I am not sure why, yet no one seemed to worry about it when it was reported – I would like to see how those calculations look for this school year).

I wish I had the absolute answers to post. I am frustrated by the budget process. I am disappointed in the areas that are targeted for cuts. I am disappointed by a system that seems to be marching as lemmings toward their own demise (union teacher contracts).
The Trib last week had an enlightening (translate that to scary) article about Chicago area school districts that are planning on layoffs next year – I didn’t add up the totals, but I have to believe that number was excess of 3,000 teachers in the aggregate being let go this summer. Couple that with the graduating college class and that adds up to lots of teachers on the street. That could create some interesting hiring opportunities in the future.

*** To all teachers reading this, I am not for taking away any benefits from anyone that has earned them. But, the faucet has to close – it has become too top heavy to be sustainable. Earned/accrued benefits should be funded for and paid. I have personally met some great teachers here in D41 that have been interested in my kids’ activities, supportive of their abilities while being challenging and inspiring. The small Frys couldn’t be where they are without them.
.
.
.
Too many tangents – maybe that is the influence of my recent visit to the Grand Canyon. And like the Grand Canyon, this problem looks too big to fix. However, unlike the Grand Canyon, this problem is in my backyard.

Teacher's unions will be forced to make a choice, lose jobs or renegotiate benefits because there isn't money for both.

Maybe we can start by getting rid of unneeded assistant principals in grade schools. That would probably save $400k per year.

Dang that type ahead feature on my phone - or maybe I was thinking a good drink would be useful before reading the BB.

Yep, as I mentioned above after seeing the two good catches - that type ahead feature on my phone obviously knew that a good drink is necessary when dealing with this BB.

BTW, Mr. Escalante did great work with kids that some would considered doomed to underachievement due to their backgrounds. Funny, no.

Did you also hear the Mr. Escalante taught as many as fifty students.

Or that he was removed from his Math Chairmanship department by his fellow teachers.

Or that after he left the Math department has never been the same.

Did you know he had the same salary as any other teacher in that school with the same years or education.

So what his reward. I mean aside from doing a lot of good. Not mocking that . Just pointing out the barriers to excellence.

They made a movie about him because what he did was so rare. Thats the point.

You've got a point regarding the 'halo', or its converse, effect. People, including teachers too many times, do expect students from 'good' backgrounds to do well, as well as not expecting much from students from 'bad' backgrounds. But, I agree more with Side of Fry's concepts, than just saying that 'good' kids will do well, and 'bad' kids won't, regardless of resources available to them.

BTW, what's up with all the thefts at GW that were mentioned in the Trib today - or just a slow newsday. Did they ever find the insulin pump from a while back?

quote:

Originally posted by darlili:
Dang that type ahead feature on my phone - or maybe I was thinking a good drink would be useful before reading the BB.

Type ahead feature, eh? Aren't those set to fill-in the most often used words based on the input of the first few letters? Exactly HOW often do you text the word "magnum"?? Hmmmm??

Well, I had been arranging a dinner event about a week ago which did include some discussion of various wines - guess I was using that word more than I realized! Although, I still think it was the mindreading feature that just knows it's better to be at least somewhat inebriated before checking the board.

Sounds good to me.

At least the football is fun to watch. And performs at a pretty high level

So many good points are made on this bulletin board. However, so few read this. You would be amazed how many parents have NO idea what is going on !! How can we increase awareness. Surely we are not just posting our opinions here to get a kick out of our own ideas. Once again, side of Frys, I agree with you.

If spending more on education, or spending it the way we've been spending it over the last twenty years has done any good. Show me the results. Show me where all this spending has done any good.

SOF points out that we can't reward good teachers nor get rid of bad ones. So what is the point of giving more money to a system that is so totally inefficient that essentially it rewards mediocrity.

All I keep hearing is we have to give the schools more and more resources yet the results never increase.