Steve Jobs Blames Education Problems on Teacher Unions

Parents Forum
41

<p>WashDad:</p>

<p>Simple. People cannot pick "good" schools over "bad" schools because the only available measurement is test scores. Test scores are most influenced by the talent of the students admitted. My school district has open choice. Naturally, some schools market to talented students, thereby turning out great test scores. Those test scores attract more talented students because, after all, test scores prove it's a "good" school, right?</p>

<p>But here's the thing. Overall test scores in the district have not improved at all when controlled for statewide trends and demographic shifts. All that's happened is that kids have gotten moved around from one school to another, with some schools getting an outsized share of gifted children. In addition, the school a child attends appears to have no impact on future GPA.</p>

<p>Diamonds in, diamonds out. </p>

<p>Open choice, which is essentially the same in its economic impact as a voucher system, has has no real impact on school quality.</p>

42

<p>ucla_dad:</p>

<p>A number of really strong minds have worked and worked the problem of performance-influenced pay and, yet, we have roughly 1/3 of US employees in those systems saying that the systems actually accomplish what they're set up to do.</p>

<p>You clearly have a perfect solution to this issue. Would you please share it with me? My consulting business needs a boost.</p>

43

<p>
[quote]
The worst thing about public schools is not the teachers, but THE KIDS. In private schools, when the kids behave horribly, they ARE GONE. It is way way WAY WAY WAY too difficult to get rid of troublesome kids in the public schools. They wreck it for everyone.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Only if the private school has a waiting list. Not all do.</p>

44

<p>Because I have never encountered a single private school in my region without a waiting list (that includes the lowest quality parochial schools, btw. in the poorest areas), the issue of dismissing unruly students is a non-issue in our territory. Here's the picture: </p>

<p>small percentage of thriving, well-funded publics (also known as "high-rent/high mortgage-fight like tigers to get into): extreme good luck getting into those & qualifying for the mortgage;</p>

<p>small percentage of mediocre privates that are vastly better than most publics, except those above;</p>

<p>tiny, tiny percentage of elegant privates: fight tooth-and-nail to get in; bribe whomever you need to; sleep with whomever you need to</p>

<p>tiny percentage of public magnets still actually enrolling students & having something resembling a program; often these are arts magnets, & you'll need to have some kind of "art" to qualify for admission;</p>

<p>vast wasteland of underperforming publics, populated mostly by African-Americans, poor whites, & immigrants from many lands whose primary language is definitely not English;</p>

<p>small site charter movement with mixed success at staying afloat, regardless of often smashing success with immediate results. The reason: bureaucracy. State says it's perfectly fine if said above "vast wasteland" continues to underperform Major, but a charter school? No way, Jose. Must show meteoric rise in test scores within an unreasonable time frame, or the charter school gets closed. It's a shame: some of these have pulled underperforming students from 4 grades below level to 1 or 2 grade levels below, overnight. Yet State has a rigid bar for performance of these charters, within a rigid time frame. And State gives meager, meager funds for these charters (both site & homeschool). And teachers' unions vigorously oppose the creation of new ones, lobbying the State against them whenever possible.</p>

<p>I ask you, Do you think there's <em>not</em> a waiting list at even one Private in my region? What a rhetorical question.
(Yes, privates have no problems suspending & expelling students, & telling off parents if need be.)</p>

45

<p>Tarhunt:</p>

<p>I don't have a perfect solution but I know that given a choice of paying (or employing) an employee where their performance is a factor or paying an employee based on a strict formula of training classes taken and years at the company, I'd pick the performance method.</p>

<p>In most companies one's pay, promotion opportunities (and thus pay), and one's ability to remain employed at the company are influenced by their performance. Of course, many people always feel that others (but not themselves) are probably overpaid and probably don't do as good a job as they themelves do which I'm sure factors into the 1/3 number you quoted. </p>

<p>I think most private businesses would go bankrupt if they were saddled with the constraints the teachers unions impose.</p>

46

<p>epiphany:</p>

<p>My school district has public schools so well-regarded (overall) that a number of privates have opened and then gone belly up. There are a few, small privates with longevity and waiting lists. I suspect the kids are well-behaved in those privates, but that's because of the parents. I doubt they have even one kid a year who's thrown out for conduct issues.</p>

<p>What we also have, though, is a number of publics that are perfectly good schools but happen to be in areas that are less advantaged than other areas. Because of open enrollment, many parents assume that these are not "good" schools because the test scores aren't as good as those located in wealthier areas. So, they open enroll elsewhere, thereby creating a major test score gap that is completely accounted for by the talent of the students and not by the education.</p>

<p>Since funding is capitated, the schools with the lower test scores keep getting less and less money to deal with a student body that is increasingly (on percentage terms) at risk. So, those schools begin to put more and more students into special ed in order to get better funding. It's a freakin' vicious cycle of idiocy, driven by completely inadequate measurements of school quality.</p>

47

<p>Tarhunt, it seems to me that using longitudinal data would address the issue of determining whether a school produces any "added value". The use of this kind of data is not widespread at this time, and many school administrators don't know how to use it even if they assemble it, but the situation is changing. </p>

<p>Furthermore, careful study of longitudinal data can be used to improve the assessment of individual teacher effectiveness, which I think addresses the concerns of many that merit pay evaluations are far too subjective and too dependent on the quality of the students' families, rather than the quality of the teacher and/or the teacher's methods.</p>

<p>And what about the unitary pay scale, speaking of contentious issues?</p>

48

<p>ucla_dad:</p>

<p>I'm not suggesting that I like the idea of union job security or rigid, non-performance-based salary increase rules. But what bugs me is all this silver bullet nonsense from peoplel who write to newspapers and, yes, post on bulletin boards.</p>

<p>"If we just got rid of union job security" says one, or "if the kids would just behave," says another, then everything would be utopian. Or "if everyone would just be more like Jaime Escalante" or what have you.</p>

<p>Lost in all this is that the data on more than 50,000 readers and their progress is crystal clear: improving reading skills depends on how much one reads and how well one comprehends what one read (reading at the proper level). That's the simple part. What's harder is structuring the elementary classroom to get those results, including statistical process control.</p>

<p>And don't get me started on the "back in the day" commentators. If there ever was a Golden Age of American education, I can't locate it.</p>

49

<p>According to the NEA the average public school teacher salary (for 2004-2005) in the US was $47,674 and in California it was $57,876.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.nea.org/neatodayextra/salaries.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.nea.org/neatodayextra/salaries.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

50

<p>midmo:</p>

<p>Theoretically, you are right, assuming a constant population which, in many school districts, isn't a reasonable assumption. Even if you can control the population, though, you are going to get distortion. For instance, standards for a year's worth of progress are set, supposedly, at a year for the average kid. Presumably, exceptional kids can exceed a year's worth of progress with average instruction, while more challenged kids might need exceptional teaching to make a year's worth of progress.</p>

<p>Metrics are the bear, here.</p>

51

<p>
[quote]
Open choice, which is essentially the same in its economic impact as a voucher system, has has no real impact on school quality.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I'd have to respectfully disagree with that on at least two grounds. </p>

<p>First, I live in a state in which we have statewide open enrollment--not just open enrollment confined to one school district. See I see a real-world example of a broader choice among government-operated schools. It really does seem to drive all the school districts to improve their programs for all learners. Every client counts when every client has the power to shop. </p>

<p>Second, a voucher/capitation payment plan open to a wider array of providers than the currently existing set of government-operated schools will offer more choices. The real-world examples are Alberta (in North America) and the Netherlands (with over a century of experience in schools being equally funded by student enrollment whether government-operated or privately operated). More details about the differences between choice-among-public-schools and full diversity of providers can be found in various bibliographic references I collected during the 1990s. </p>

<p><a href="http://learninfreedom.org/school_state.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://learninfreedom.org/school_state.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

52

<p>One other consideration is that in many cases families are very well positioned to judge whether or not a school is good FOR THEIR KID even if the school doesn't have fancy statistics or location in a wealthy neighborhood. It's enough to help some kids to learn to be treated with respect and dignity. If they have the power to shop for a better situation, school administrators will either </p>

<p>a) send the "turkey trot" out the door </p>

<p>or </p>

<p>b) devise a way to teach teachers to teach better, </p>

<p>and either of those responses would improve overall school quality in the system as a whole.</p>

53

<p>Tarhunt said:

[quote]
Simple. People cannot pick "good" schools over "bad" schools because the only available measurement is test scores.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I think you are assuming facts not in evidence. Cite, please? </p>

<p>In selecting colleges, for example, where test scores are widely used and highly publicized, those scores are a minor selection criteria. </p>

<p>It just occurred to me that you might have meant student scores on standardized tests as a measure of the success of the educational process? Totally irrelevant, IMO. The standardized testing of elementary school kids is beyond a joke, and that of older kids only slightly less so. In fact, not ever having to deal with the WASL is a selling point for public schools here in Washington.</p>

<p>When we looked for a private school for our kids, which they attended for four years, it never even occurred to me to ask what their test scores were. I did meet teachers, look over curriculum, and talk to other parents before making my choice. At the public school, they were -- as a matter of policy -- not even allowed to use parental wishes as a factor in classroom placement. I guess parents are just too stupid to have any insight into the best educational decisions for their children...</p>

54

<p>Jobs criticized teachers' unions, not teachers. The difference could not be better explained than by quoting Albert Shanker, one of the good guys who led one of those most august and venerable institutions:</p>

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

<p>Randi Weingarten must have been so proud!</p>

55

<p>tokenadult:</p>

<p>We also have statewide open choice. The reality, though, is that very few kids have the means to switch from one school district to another. We can't run buses for every single kid who wants to go 30 miles away to another school. My school district allows this only when there is an opening, and those openings happen only when there are slots left over after in-district kids enroll. Naturally, the schools with the highest test scores never have slots left over. The effect is nil.</p>

<p>Now, the state board of education will point to improving test scores over time, but there are two problems with this. One is that it is not at all clear what is causing this improvement. There's no clear patters. Secondly, my wife, who has seen these tests for all elementary grade levels for more than six years, is quite certain that the tests are getting easier. I called the state board to see if they were validating test questions properly and, to my disgust, they didn't even know what I was talking about.</p>

56

<p>Biggest problem in the future will be to get people to stay in the classrooms and teach. That's my two cents.</p>

57

<p>Then there is the No Child Left Behind Act that is a good theory but poor in practice. I could go on and on but I won't.</p>

<p>I agree, mostly, with Mr. Jobs. I have seen first hand teachers who do not belong in the classroom any longer yet continue to collect their six digit salary. Yes, in our district many teachers make six digits, pay little for health care and can retire at 55 with the district paying their health insurance cost until they are medicare eligible. The average salary in the district is in the mid 80's. My d had an honors Chem teacher who taught when I was at the school. I swear he was handing out the same worksheets we used in 1981. He was never available for help and told the kids the class was largely self-study, honors chem? His salary is $109,000. Across the hall was another teacher who I had when I was there, my d also had him. He was a great teacher when I was there and still is. He is now dept. chair. He remains enthusiastic and engages his students. He makes $116,000 per year and, in my opinion, deserves every penny. I don't know the answers but I do believe there needs to be some way to get rid of teachers who are just collecting large pay checks and biding their time until retirement.</p>

58

<p>WashDad:</p>

<p>I believe you are citing studies about selecting colleges based on test scores of the entering class from NACAC data, which are self-reported by students and parents and averaged over all colleges. I've seen that data and, as I recall, they are not segmented by students making choices to attend very selective schools. Those data also indicate that students pay no attention to US News rankings. Yet, colleges report that a drop in US News rankings decreases the quantity and quality of applicants and admits, and increases the amount of financial aid the college must offer to get a targeted yield.</p>

<p>There's a disconnect here, somewhere.</p>

<p>In any event, the data in my district are pretty clear. The school reports to parents mandated by the state have a great deal of data on them, but the ratings given school are entirely based on raw standardized test scores. Not surprisingly, open enrollment patterns tend to follow standardized test score performance extremely closely.</p>

59

<p>$116,000 for a public school teacher?</p>

<p>Someone should tell all the budding iBankers!</p>

60

<p>Well, you folks enjoy your debate. I expect to see all the problems with American education solved by tomorrow night when I'll have caught up with my life (I hope).</p>

<p>Good night!</p>