The State of Education, Follow-Up

Recently, I posted an email response from my cousin, EJ, a Ph.D in Education, "On Education and No Child Left Behind." There were so many incredible, thoughtful comments to that post that my cousin sent me the following, again in an email, in response. I am not going to blockquote it, though. Anything I have to say will be in italics.

There is one major part of her email that dealt with one specific comment, which I will make clear. That exchange will be set apart to separate it from the rest of her comments. Again, the only changes made were spelling out abbreviations, removing identifying information, and formatting. If anything got messed up in the translation, that is solely my doing. Okay - I'm getting out of the way now, and leaving this to Cousin EJ:

If I'd have thought about it, I'd have said that not all teachers are bad, not all parents are bad, and not all education majors have a sense of entitlement ... but I didn't think about it because I thought it was obvious that not everyone is bad, so it seems like I smeared everyone with the same brush. There are parents, students, teachers (pre-k to post-doc levels), & administrators who are truly concerned about education and want it to be RIGHT. There are others who are not. I in no way blame parents who have to work 2, 3, or 4 jobs to barely support the family for not working with their kids (i.e., helping with homework, making sure the kids get to bed at a decent hour, reading to the kids) for any of the problems. I do blame parents who think sports and other after school activities are more important than education, specifically having kids do independent reading after school (research supports that there are middle and upper SES level parents who feel this way) because those kids end up thinking in some cases $$ is the be all and end all; reading/school is to help you make more money.

I should also add that I played sports in school, as did my husband, as did our children. I have no problem with sports because people love the game (I enjoy watching sports and attending sporting events) and for teaching skills and discipline as well as sportsmanship – as long as that’s really done. I do have a problem with the win at all costs attitudes. When we lived there, kids in TX were held back in school so they’d be bigger in high school and have a better chance of being drafted for college playing meaning a better chance at the pros, even though chances of either are not high. I am sure this goes on in many states, although I only have experience with one state.

I do know plenty of teachers who are trying to make a difference, who are trying to fix the school system as well as society.

It is the teacher who makes the difference in the classroom, as one of the writers (reader at NQ) said. I fully agree. We need, as I said in my letter to my senators, fully qualified teachers teaching; ones who want to be in the classroom, ones who are willing to work; ones who are willing to continue their education, even if it is not required. We need passionate teachers who love learning and love teaching and even appreciate children. Not the well behaved, no problem children, but all children! That's one of my rants right now, that we teach to the middle and the children labeled as being in need of special education (learning disabled, emotionally disturbed, etc.) and we dumb down the curriculum for all children - we do not really help most children reach their full potential. In many cases, we do not challenge the gifted children or even bother to teach them – the thought is “they'll get it anyway.” My nephews' teachers were scared of them because the boys were so bright. Children who are academically gifted and talented need to be taught strategies and to become skilled learned, too, just like every other child.

As for the one where the person said colleges of education or schools of education/ departments of ed are the "cash cow" of the universities, yes, they are. What the “education” area is varies from institution to institution; who is housed in it also varies. In my school of education, we do not have the secondary education programs even though we teach courses for them; in other institutions, pre-k-12th grade education programs are all housed under the same umbrella.

HOWEVER, being a cash cow doesn't do the State of Education in my institution any good. We are less well funded than the Arts & Sciences for example. Teacher education has more adjuncts teaching than any other major. Some adjuncts are good and want students to be prepared to be teachers and see it as a responsibility, others are teaching because they want extra income for paying off school loans, going on vacation, or making "luxury repairs" to the house. Some adjuncts really teach (we have some fantastic ones) and some in a 15 week semester will cancel classes 3-5 times and let classes out early each week. Sometimes students complain, sometime they don't.

Many institutions are hiring as many adjuncts as they possibly can because the monetary cost of paying an adjunct is WAY less than paying a tenure track person or even a full-time non-tenure track person. There are no benefits to pay for one thing, and wages, even if the pay was $5K a course, for an adjunct to teach eight classes a year is only $40K – less than a brand new tenure track person makes in salary w/out even counting benefits. However, in the long run, are the students really getting the best education? Maybe, maybe not…It is a real crap shoot. I know adjuncts at my institution who teach at 3 institutions, during the same semester. There are no office hours, no time to see other faculty, no time to help students.

I used to be against home schooling - am still am when it is not done right, just as I am against any education that is not done right. However, I know a lot of parents personally who have home schooled their children and the kids are well educated, intellectually curious, and students I've enjoyed having in my class or knowing in the community. I think home schooling is a good idea for parents who can and will do a good job.

All of the people in the liberal arts and sciences are not in it to soak up knowledge – some are there to get a degree to go make money. These are not the ones who want to teach at least not in the beginning. Judging from some of my students this semester in the graduate program, who are coming back to school to get certification, and who hold BA/BS degrees (they were all Liberal Arts majors at the UnderGraduate level), not all of them should be teachers...They are not passionate about teaching; neither are they passionate about learning.

In UnderGraduate school, I was an English major, teaching was my minor as was psychology (yeah, I was a nerd who wanted to take more classes than I needed). I knew though that I wanted to teach and had known it since I was little. I have nothing against the Liberal Arts requirements for education students. I fully support them. I loved taking all the Liberal Arts classes, with the exception of my math class, which was a 5 hour class-too much to go into here as to why I didn’t like it, but it goes back to junior high and senior high school. I loved Philosophy, English, History, Biology, Geography… I just read an article where the writer was saying how we've (the US system) even dumbed that down, making it such a smorgasbord that students STILL don't get a good education in the Liberal Ats.

Some states have required master's degrees for teachers to keep teaching. This is just wrong. Students are there because they have to be not because they want to be-there's a huge difference in the level of student. We have states which require _ _ _ number of hours of "renewal" credit - teachers can get these credits for taking things like college classes in their area of certification or coursework leading to more certification, as well as for attending workshops on things like "basketweaving" (not for art teachers, I mean for the whole teacher population including those for whom there is little to no value in the workshop although one can always get something of value out of anything if one so wishes), "incorporating primary sources into teaching," "using library resources to create lessons," "the wisdom of mentoring (The Wisdom of Mentoring hybrid course makes training mentors easy and efficient. This training for individual mentors combines online training with face-to-face peer seminars conducted by a designated facilitator from your district. A user-friendly manual guides the designated district facilitator as that person leads peer seminars on a schedule and/or design that fits your district. The content is based on best practices, strong mentor program recommendations and research, and the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS) core propositions, found HERE, and " "A Nurtured World" (about being green) found HERE, and so on.

Comment from H.D. Rider, with Cousin EJ's response in Caps (no, she's not yelling, just differentiating):

Sorry, but I have to disagree with many of you…including Rev Amy’s cousin. A lot of what’s wrong in education today is a result of the publish or perish gobbledygook that eternally springs forth from the colleges of education…from professors who also have an unholy alliance with textbook publishers–an alliance that bears a close resemblance to the relationship between big pharma, colleges of medicine, and medical doctors. The emphasis is on profit. What’s best for students is secondary.

THE PUBLISH OR PERISH IDEA COMES FROM THE RESEARCH ONE (R1) INSTITUTIONS. ALL OF THEIR PROFESSORS WHO HOPE TO BE TENURED OR GET PROMOTED HAVE TO HAVE A CERTAIN NUMBER OF ARTICLES PUBLISHED EVERY YEAR OR A CERTAIN NUMBER OF GRANTS IN THE HOPPER OR WHATEVER IS APPROPRIATE FOR THEIR AREA OF SPECIALTY. ART PROFESSORS HAVE TO HAVE SHOWINGS, FOR EXAMPLE. AT R1S, RESEARCH IS THE BIG DEAL, THE MOST IMPORTANT THING; RESEARCHERS GETS MORE MONEY IN TERMS OF SALARY, GRANTS, AND OTHER PERKS. THOSE OF US WHO GET OUR DOCTORATES AS A RULE GET THEM FROM AN R1.

COMPREHENSIVE INSTITUTIONS ARE DIFFERENT FROM THE R1S. MANY COMPREHENSIVES WERE FOUNDED AS “NORMAL SCHOOLS,” WHICH WERE FOR TEACHER EDUCATION. IN MOST COMPREHENSIVE INSTITUTIONS, THERE IS A FOCUS ON TEACHING, SERVICE, AND SCHOLARSHIP. IN SOME INSTITUTIONS, THE INDIVIDUALS GET A CHOICE AS TO WHICH IS MOST IMPORTANT IN TERMS OF PROMOTION/TENURE; IN OTHERS THERE IS NO CHOICE. ALL 3 AREAS HAVE TO BE GOOD (A CERTAIN LEVEL AS DETERMINED BY THE INSTITUTION OR DEPARTMENT), BUT SOMEONE COULD DEVOTE MORE TIME TO SERVICE THAN TO SCHOLARSHIP – MAYBE ONLY DOING ONE MAJOR PRESENTATION AT YEAR OR ATTENDING ONE MAJOR CONFERENCE A YEAR AND SERVING ON 10 COMMITTEES ON CAMPUS FOR EXAMPLE. AT COMPREHENSIVES, ONE’S TEACHING ALWAYS HAS TO BE AT THE MINIMUM STANDARD SET BY THE INSTITUTION OR DEPARTMENT – AND ONE NEEDS TO TEACH A FULL LOAD AS DEFINED BY THE INSTITUTION, UNLESS ONE GETS EXCUSED FROM TEACHING FOR SOME REASON, SUCH AS THE ADMINISTRATIVE DUTIES OF A DEPARTMENT CHAIR.

THERE ARE PROFESSORS WHO WRITE TEXTBOOKS AND OTHER BOOKS. ONE OF MY FRIENDS WROTE A BOOK ABOUT A SPECIFIC INSTRUMENT – IT’S NOT A TEXTBOOK, BUT AN INFORMATIVE BOOK ABOUT A SPECIFIC INSTRUMENT, OF INTEREST ONLY TO A VERY SMALL AUDIENCE. THERE ARE PROFESSORS WHO WRITE TEXTBOOKS AND SPEND MORE TIME WRITING THEIR BOOKS THAN THEY DO IN THE CLASSROOM TEACHING. THERE ARE SOME WHO WRITE A TEXTBOOK OR A SUPPLEMENT BECAUSE THEY COULDN’T FIND ANY OTHER WAY TO GET THE MATERIALS AND INFORMATION THEY WANTED THEIR STUDENTS TO KNOW. I’LL AGREE, THERE ARE SOME PROFESSORS WHO HAVE AN “UNHOLY ALLIANCE” WITH A PUBLISHER. MANY PROFESSORS WHO WRITE A LOT OF BOOKS ARE ONES THAT THE UNIVERSITY KEEPS ON B/C IT BRINGS A LOT OF FAME AND RESPECT TO THE UNI; THE PROF MAY NOT TEACH MUCH AT ALL BUT DOES DO A LOT OF RESEARCH. I DON’T KNOW IF THE INSTITUTION GETS ANY OF THE $$ FROM THE PUBLISHERS OR IF IT IS $$ THAT COMES B/C THE SCHOOL HAS BRAND NAME RECOGNITION – “THIS MUST BE A GOOD SCHOOL TO GO TO BECAUSE PROFESSOR A IS EMPLOYED HERE AND HAS WRITTEN 15 TEXTBOOKS!” NOBODY IN MY SCHOOL OF EDUCATION HAS AN “UNHOLY ALLIANCE;” MOST OF US ARE TOO BUSY TEACHING, GRADING PAPERS, DOING SERVICE WORK, AND DOING SCHOLARSHIP TO HAVE A SERIAL BOOK CONTRACT.

THE EMPHASIS ON SCHOOLS AS I SAID EARLIER HAS BEEN ON PROFIT – THE INDUSTRIAL/FACTORY MODEL. IN PRE-K-12, IT IS ON GETTING WELL TRAINED WORKERS OUT FOR THE WORKFORCE. IN POST SECONDARY INSTITUTIONS, IT IS ON PROFIT FOR THE STATE AT LEAST IN THE STATE RUN SCHOOLS; PRIVATE INSTITUTIONS GET TO KEEP THEIR PROFITS, MAYBE, I DON’T KNOW. ELEMENTARY EDUCATION ATTRACTS. (COLLEGES OF EDUCATION DO NOT BRING A LOT OF PROFIT IN TO THEIR INSTITUTION SOMETIMES – I KNOW ATHLETICS IN THE LATE 80S DONATED A MILLION DOLLARS TO THE COLLEGE OF ED AT ONE INSTITUTION BECAUSE THE COLLEGE OF EDUCATION NEEDED THE MONEY AND DIDN’T HAVE IT. I ATTENDED THE SCHOOL AT THE TIME.)

Colleges of Ed have long been cash cows for their universities. So, yes, the university systems, the colleges of education, and professors of education have fought alternative forms of teacher certification tooth and nail. Alternative certification is a serious threat to their money train. I sat through a number of state board of education meetings regarding alternative certification when state troopers with sidearms had to be present and highly visible to ensure the safety of those present. I was glad they were there and, yes, it was that desperate and that scary.

AS I SAID SOMEWHERE ELSE, COLLEGES OF EDUCATION ARE CASH COWS, BUT IT MAY OR MAY NOT DO THE UNIVERSITY/COMPREHENSIVE COLLEGE ANY GOOD. IN SOME STATE SCHOOLS, WE BRING IN A LOT OF TUITION MONEY IN THE EDUCATION MAJORS, BUT THE INSTITUTION DOESN’T GET TO KEEP THE TUITION MONEY DURING THE REGULAR SPRING AND FALL SEMESTERS. IT IS ONLY IN THE SUMMERS THAT THE INSTITUTION GETS TO KEEP TUITION MONEY.

Sorry to disillusion you, folks, but if university colleges of education were the be-all-end-all of training teachers, we wouldn’t even be having this discussion.

NOT ALL TEACHER EDUCATION COURSES ARE AT UNIVERSITIES OR COLLEGES OF ED, AS I SAID ABOVE. THERE ARE DIFFERENCES IN LEVELS OF INSTITUTIONS, AND IN LEVELS OF TEACHER EDUCATION MODELS, FROM COLLEGES TO DEPARTMENTS TO A MAJOR WITHIN A DEPARTMENT.
IF I THOUGHT THE ALTERNATIVE ROUTES TO CERTIFICATION WERE GOOD, I’D BE IN FAVOR – BUT TOO MANY ALTERNATE ROUTES ARE NOT WELL PLANNED; SOME DO NOT INCLUDE MUCH IF ANY “FACE TIME” IN FRONT OF CHILDREN (STUDENT TEACHING, PRACTICUM, VOLUNTEER EXPERIENCE, WHATEVER IT MAY BE CALLED IN AN INSTITUTION).

Alternative forms of teacher certification were created out of desperation by state legislatures because the colleges of education were failing the public schools’ need for qualified, well trained teachers.

THERE ARE MANY, MANY WELL-TRAINED TEACHERS IN EVERY STATE WHO WENT THROUGH THE TRADITIONAL TEACHER EDUCATION ROUTE. MANY DO NOT WANT TO GO INTO HIGH NEEDS AREAS (FOR EXAMPLE, CONTENT-MATH/SCIENCE AND GEOGRAPHIC-RURAL/INNER CITY). AND, THERE ARE WAY TOO MANY ELEMENTARY OR CHILDHOOD/EARLY CHILDHOOD TEACHERS AND NOT ENOUGH SECONDARY TEACHERS SO ALTERNATIVE ROUTES TO CERTIFICATION WERE SET UP.

I went through a college of education program and I can personally testify that the vast majority of my “education” courses were a total waste of time. One course was outstanding, but it was taught by an adjunct instructor, an administrator from the local public school system who was so dissatisfied with the college of ed’s graduates that she decided to spend her nights teaching some of their classes herself to ensure that graduates had at least some of the skills needed to ensure student success.

I WOULD AGREE THAT MANY COURSES DO SEEM TO BE A WASTE OF TIME – I CAN SAY THAT THERE’S BEEN A SHIFT, NOT OF OUR DOING, AWAY FROM REAL CONTENT TEACHING TO NAMBY PAMBY STUFF.

I WAS BOTH A TEACHING ASSISTANT AND AN INSTRUCTOR WHEN I WAS IN SCHOOL FOR MY DOCTORATE. I ATTENDED AN R1 AND WAS IN THE COLLEGE OF EDUCATION. THE PROFESSORS THERE TAUGHT THE DOC LEVEL CLASSES; ADJUNCTS (WHO TAUGHT ONE OR TWO CLASSES A SEMESTER), INSTRUCTORS (TAUGHT AT LEAST HALF-TIME AND UP TO FULL-TIME), AND GRADUATE ASSISTANTS (WHO TAUGHT USUALLY 1 OR 2 CLASSES A SEMESTER) THE UNDERGRADS WHO WERE EDUCATION MAJORS. MANY OF US WHO WERE TAS OR INSTRUCTORS HAD TAUGHT IN PRE-K-12TH GRADE FOR A MINIMUM OF 5 YEARS. IN GENERAL, NO MATTER WHAT THE CONTENT OR CONCEPTS, THOSE CLASSES WERE WELL TAUGHT AND WERE GOOD. OTHER TAS / INSTRUCTORS HAD NEVER TAUGHT AND HAD NO CLUE ABOUT HOW TO TEACH, HOW TO GET CONTENT AND CONCEPTS ACROSSS. NEARLY TO A PERSON, THOSE CLASSES WERE AWFUL.

SOME OF THE ADJUNCTS I KNOW AND WORK WITH ARE FANTASTIC. SOME OF THE ADJUNCTS I KNOW ARE AWFUL. SOME OF THE INSTRUCTORS I KNOW ARE EXCELLENT. SOME ARE AWFUL. SOME OF THE FULL-TIME, TENURED, FULL PROFESSORS ARE EXCELLENT. SOME ARE AWFUL.

And, yes, far too many of today’s college graduates can’t pass high school level basic skills tests in reading, writing, and math…don’t even mention critical thinking skills. It’s pathetic.

Part of my job was reviewing basic skills exams. There were many days when I wanted to take my own diplomas off the walls and chuck them in the trash since a college degree no longer represented advanced learning and critical thinking abilities.
Thoroughly disillusioned, I threw in the towel, took early retirement, and returned to the community where I once taught first and second grade. I was saddened to learn that many of my tested and officially designated gifted and talented students had been dumped in special education classes as they moved through the system. Why? They were different and more challenging to teach…can we say “non-conformists.”

I AGREE. MANY KIDS CLASSIFIED AS ACADEMICALLY GIFTED AND TALENTED (AND I THINK STUDENTS WHO ARE ALSO ARTISTICALLY GIFTED AND TALENTED BUT MAY NOT BE CLASSIFIED) ARE “NON-CONFORMISTS.” MANY TEACHERS DISLIKE HAVING THE NON-CONFORMISTS IN CLASS BECAUSE THEY ARE OUT-OF-THE-BOX THINKERS AND DOERS; IN OTHER WORDS, THEY REQUIRE REAL THINKING ON THE PART OF THE TEACHER TO TEACH. (I THINK REAL THINKING SHOULD BE GOING ON ANYWAY, ON EVERYONE’S PARTS, TEACHERS’ AND STUDENTS’.)

Far too many high school dropouts are gifted students. I taught fine arts, a common dumping ground for many such students at the high school level, but I was too late and in the wrong subject area to save them. I saw many of “them” again at the community college in developmental education courses as they sat with many other bright students who quite simply had never been taught in the public schools. Sad, sad, sad.

So, we condemn our best and our brightest to oblivion, serve up touchy feel-good crapola to the remaining students, and then we scratch our heads and wonder why our students compare so unfavorably to other countries. NCLB comes along and ostensibly forces schools to ensure the success of all students…not just the teacher “pleasers”…there’s a big difference between teacher “pleasers” and gifted and talented students by the way. From the wailing and crying, from the gnashing of teeth, the lies, and the cheating that followed, one would assume that ensuring every student’s success was an edict from the devil himself. The blame slides directly down hill.

AGREED. SUCCESS FOR ALL NO MATTER WHAT. YES, TEACHER PLEASERS COME IN ALL GUISES-THE ACADEMICALLY GIFTED/TALENTED, THE GIFTED ATHELETES, THE SNIDE SNOTS, THE CHILDREN LABELD AS BEING SPECIAL NEEDS, THE REGULAR JOE/JANE … ANYBODY CAN BE A TEACHER PLEASER.

CHEATING ON STANDARDIZED TESTS HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR 25 YEARS THAT I KNOW OF, SO IT PREDATES NCLB. TEACHERS WHERE I TAUGHT IN NC CHEATED FOR THE KIDS, MAKING ERASURES AND BUBBLING IN THE RIGHT ANSWER. THE EXCUSE WAS “I KNOW SO AND SO KNOWS THE ANSWER AND MUST’VE JUST COLORED THE WRONG BUBBLE IN.” CHEATING HAS GOTTEN WORSE OR MORE TEACHERS/ADMINISTRATORS ARE GETTING CAUGHT AND MAKING THE PAPERS, I DON’T KNOW WHICH.

The colleges blame the high schools, the high schools blame the middle schools who in turn blame the elementary schools. The elementary teachers blame the parents, the mother blames the father, and the father doubts the kid is even his…and so it goes. These untaught children are “Nobody’s Child,” except when there’s money to be made.

NOBODY’S CHILD IS EVERYBODY’S FAULT.

Yes, it’s a nasty cycle. But, whom do we blame? I lay the blame at the door of the colleges of education. They have monopolized teacher training in America since Horace Mann in the nineteenth century. They had plenty of time to get it right, but obviously failed to do so. Where do all those expensive, crackpot, failed instructional programs come from? Right out of some prestigious college of education…you can go to the bank on that one.

If I had young children today, I’d home school them. I observed middle school history and science classes where two thirds of the students couldn’t read their grade level textbooks and the teachers had to resort to videos to get concepts across to their students. Even if your children are bright and can read on an advanced level, they are, in all probability, wasting their time in today’s public schools.

I THINK I WOULD HOME SCHOOL MY KIDS TODAY, TOO.

AGAIN, AS I SAID IN MY ORIGINAL LETTER, THERE IS NO EASY ANSWER. SOCIETY IS SICK, SCHOOLS ARE SICK, WE AS A PEOPLE ARE SICK.


Interesting links:

On unprepared teachers, alternatively certified teachers & other things, HERE
On the impact of supervision and student teaching on retention rates of teachers, HERE
Tteacher prep and retention, HERE
Teacher retention, HERE
Teacher quality and retention, leads to the next link, I think, or the one above this one, HERE
More on teacher retention, HERE

And Cousin EJ sent this addendum: I thought you’d like to know I talked with some student teachers who were on campus today for a conference.

At least three districts near me (within 50 miles) require phonics workbooks and math workbooks be worked in every day. They also have a scripted math program, which tells the teachers exactly what to say and do. There is no content knowledge needed for the teacher, only the ability to read aloud and put problems on the board or on the overhead.

Teachers in the public schools are complaining because of the lessons we have our students teach and the activities the students have to do. The lessons and activities student teachers have to do are to meet the required mandates of the various ‘governing bodies,’ such as the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Association of Educators of Young Children, Association for Childhood Education International, and other bodies with whom National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education institutions have to please. NCATE has standards we have to meet and these Special Program Areas have additional standards we have to meet.

Schools also have standards (local, state, and federal) they have to meet – and the standards imposed on all bodies (p-12 schools and institutions of higher education) of course do not have a lot of overlap.

One student teacher who nearly failed the first quarter of student teaching (because of her entitlement outlook) told her first quarter host teacher “I don’t need to know anything – my next placement is not going to be like it was with you. I am with my cousin’s best friend and she’s never had a student teacher, so it doesn’t matter what I do, she doesn’t have anything to compare with.”

I met with several supervisors today, too. They were unhappy about the entitlement expectations many student teachers had.