I 100% agree.
Bernie Sanders said public school teachers should get minimum $60k a year salary
Posts
Total:
28
public school teachers should be paid in proportion to the number of students in their class who pass standardized tests. Wherever performance can be quantified it should be used to establish a self-interested motivation.
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
using standardized tests to measure teacher performance is ridiculous no cap
-->
@BearMan
Paying for kids to be locked in a building for a decade and come out without being able to do algebra is beyond ridiculous.
Children and parents also bare responsibility for results.
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
That’s an idea, but some students are harder to teach than others. Professors with inheritely stupid kids shouldn’t be at a disadvantage compared to professors in Greenwich or Westchester.
-->
@TheUnderdog
That’s an idea, but some students are harder to teach than others. Professors with inheritely stupid kids shouldn’t be at a disadvantage compared to professors in Greenwich or Westchester.
Some students don't learn because they don't want to be there.
It is not the public's job to motivate them, that's their parents job. Cut all truancy requirements. Slavery destroys civilizations. It doesn't matter if YOU or anyone else thinks it's for their own good. All that matters is if they see it as slavery, because if they do; they will not give a shit.
Get people who do not want to be there out of there. Once you have the people who just don't give a shit out, find the ones who are obsessed with a skill-set and not higher education. Get them out too, send them to trade schools that operate on similar principles. The notion that everyone needs to get a college diploma (and the collectivist subversion of universities) has led only to the extreme cheapening of the diploma and just as with public high-schools the level of academic achievement in universities is falling rapidly (while the costs explode).
People don't die when learn a trade. If they feel like they've missed something they can learn later. What's important is $$$. $$$ determines your excess time just as it has for all human history. When you're filthy rich you have plenty of time to study, and so any attempt to improve education that leads to people being on average poorer is counter-productive.
If you have a poor neighborhood and you've got a big line of compassionate rich people ready to dump money in to help, pay the kids (as well as the teachers) extra bounty. Don't buy solar panel arrays, don't hire DIE counselors, don't pay for sports stadiums or teams, don't create bureaucratic management facilities that were never necessary before.
You may think I'm joking, but I am absolutely not; look at the budgets of the schools that fail. There is a lot of money going through them. There is no quantity of funding which cannot be wasted when failure is rewarded by more money and more staff!
If the funders find "no child left behind" to be a morally necessary stance, they can pay extra for children who are falling behind (objective universal standards). In that case the best teachers would be attracted towards the worst performing schools.
I have plenty more opinions and ideas about education, but this is the fundamental problem (along with everything else government or megacorps do). The further the disconnect between success and rewards the fewer successes you will see. This is human nature. This is why free markets work and command economies don't.
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
Get people who do not want to be there out of there.
The issue with that is people’s interests change. Like when I was in high school, I wanted to work for Crispr. Now I want to be an actuary.
Some students don't learn because they don't want to be there.
This is correct; so don’t punish their teachers with a lower salary because of it.
There is no quantity of funding which cannot be wasted when failure is rewarded by more money and more staff!
The issue with this is if you give a bad performing district less money than a well performing one, it leads to even worse scores, which lead to even less money, which lead to even worse scores, until eventually, anyone that doesn’t live in a really rich part of the country has terrible schools.
-->
@TheUnderdog
Get people who do not want to be there out of there.The issue with that is people’s interests change. Like when I was in high school, I wanted to work for Crispr. Now I want to be an actuary.
That is not a relevant issue. Whatever your interest are, if you have no interest in learning no amount of money can teach you.
That is an argument for more programming for young children to spark their interest in many fields and to try harder to keep anti-intellectual attitudes out of schools (by getting rid of people who mock 'nerds' for giving a shit).
Some students don't learn because they don't want to be there.This is correct; so don’t punish their teachers with a lower salary because of it.
It's not punishment it's sanity. Certainly don't require a teacher to try and teach people who don't want to be there, let them leave. Free up a seat for someone who does want to learn so the teacher can be paid more.
There is no quantity of funding which cannot be wasted when failure is rewarded by more money and more staff!The issue with this is if you give a bad performing district less money than a well performing one, it leads to even worse scores
You presume, if it is know that the reason for less pay is failure that may motivate better scores. Certainly rewarding failure could be expected to fail and has failed. If it's a viscous cycle either way how come charter schools do so well? How did anyone get an education before pubic schools?
No, schools work; but only when they're full of real students and run by people who know that failure to teach results in no early retirement.
For the sake of argument we could say that the funding remains constant per capita in all districts. That doesn't stop you from using that same quantity of money in ways the engage enlightened self-interest.
If the average grade of the school is abysmal, you can still route most of the money to the few sparks of achievement. Say 1% of the students care and they have one teacher who knows how to teach them. Then they pass the tests and get the equivalent of mini scholarships for their achievement.
You think the teacher who just earned the equivalent of 400k/year for the semester finals is going to move away to a rich neighborhood? Hell no, they'll look for other students who can be saved, and the students who want to win will find that teacher.
The rewards will normalize to something sane when the rest of the students and faculty do something useful.
-->
@TheUnderdog
They work like what 75% of the year at best. 60k teacher salary would be equivalent of about 80k or 90k a year
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
What if you have $60K a year salary, but then only give kids 2 weeks of summer vacation so teachers earn that pay? Discipline our youth. Discipline equals freedom.
-->
@TheUnderdog
I am a big proponent of year round schooling. Often poor kids suffer from a prolonged school break as wealthier parents will hire tutors and encourage reading in the summer. Studies consistently show that poor and wealthy kids, learn the same amount during the school year, but poorer kids have less retention over the summer break. Year round school fixes that.
So yeah, Ii would agree with what you said
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
Year round schooling has breaks in between; I'd get rid of the brakes every time. I'd want our kids in school for every day; 365 days a year. This would require twice as many teachers, but that's fine. HW is exclusively online so teachers don't have to grade; they just get the kids to learn the material and if kids struggle, then the teachers help them with problems.
I want 8th graders knowing Calculus, and 12th graders knowing Calc 3. Tests should account for a small part of grades; HW for more of it. Then my math major can be easier to learn. I also want to replace K 12 with K 16, where the last 4 years you learn either college stuff or trades, all at your school. I think doing work and learning to be independent of mom and dad should be separate tasks to learn. I stay home for my college experience; I couldn't imagine paying rent AND studying for school at the same time.
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
what schools are u going to?
most if not all people at my hs are through precalculus by senior year
a hefty portion of them are taking calc ab/bc senior year
and some are even taking multivariable
saying that school doesn't teach math is ridiculous. imo, unless somebody has learning disabilities or some sort of disadvantage, doing good in school is just a matter of putting effort into it. teachers shouldn't be punished for students who want to put in the bare minimal work.
-->
@BearMan
most if not all people at my hs are through precalculus by senior yeara hefty portion of them are taking calc ab/bc senior yearand some are even taking multivariable
Good for them, provided nobody bought each student a useless apple computer (which nobody needs), sounds like things are just fine in your neck of the woods.
saying that school doesn't teach math is ridiculous. imo, unless somebody has learning disabilities or some sort of disadvantage, doing good in school is just a matter of putting effort into it.
"Through an analysis of 150 Baltimore City Schools, 23 of them, including 10 high schools, eight elementary schools, three high schools and two middle schools, no students met math grade-level expectations, according to a report by Project Baltimore."
teachers shouldn't be punished for students who want to put in the bare minimal work.
They wouldn't be. If the student doesn't turn in homework, there is nothing to grade is there? If a student doesn't ever go to the office there is no time spent is there? If the student never shows up for class, someone else can sit in his seat.
It's not punishment to pay people for results. If you claim to be teaching 20 people and none of them succeed the common denominator is YOU. Or we could assume poor inner city kids are mentally deficient in which case it STILL DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO PAY SOMEONE TO TEACH THEM!
Public schools are garbage. Home school is the best solution.
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
Consider why they dont know algebra or to think outside the box.
My wife works for school district and one of the biggest issues is the teaching. Not necessarily because the teacher is at fault but because the practice is dull. Everyone gets taught to pass a test in a generalized setting where everyone is given the same work and treated the same.
Except some require more hands on approach while other students need more callenging course. Teaching to the test makes everyone remember x to the pressure of preventing failure but when that pressure is gone. The memory is gone.
But does that kid get help when they need it? No they go on to the next grade.
-->
@hey-yo
By "tests" I didn't necessarily mean any particular type of testing strategy, I mean in general objective standards of achievement.
More often the better, that way confusion or problems are detected early. Within limits you could put a bounty on catching kids up.
You might also have different flavors of teaching which students could choose between. We don't care how they learn, just that they can do something useful at the end.
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
What if homework becomes the testing part to the system. Then progress becomes the goal and means to measure.
-->
@TheUnderdog
Teacher's salaries should be determined by the market for the services. If you're suggesting that they should be paid $60k when the commerce they generate is significantly less, then I must ask: who foots the bill?
-->
@Athias
Teacher's salaries should be determined by the market for the services. If you're suggesting that they should be paid $60k when the commerce they generate is significantly less, then I must ask: who foots the bill?
The only way teacher salaries are exclusively determined by the market is if we abolish public schools. Do you support this?
The taxpayer foots the bill, but it’s paid for by cutting the military budget 5%.
We take better care of the military (which the US military is responsible for 17x more civilian deaths than ISIS in the Middle East), than we do the teachers that enable innovation for the future. Stop declaring a war on teachers!
-->
@TheUnderdog
The only way teacher salaries are exclusively determined by the market is if we abolish public schools. Do you support this?
As they currently function? Yes, I would get rid of the public school system.
The taxpayer foots the bill
So you intend to finance the salaries of some individuals by siphoning it from the salaries of other individuals?
but it’s paid for by cutting the military budget 5%.
Does the electorate have a say in how taxes are doled out?
We take better care of the military
As far as the proliferation of armament, yes. As it concerns military personnel, not so much.
which the US military is responsible for 17x more civilian deaths than ISIS in the Middle East
And you would have these goons and their managers regulate your children's education?
than we do the teachers that enable innovation for the future.
If this is the case, then I'm sure there will be a market for their services in the private sector.
Stop declaring a war on teachers!
Public school teachers, in my opinion, are grossly overrated.
-->
@Athias
As they currently function? Yes, I would get rid of the public school system.
But then a lot of kids aren't going to be educated and this makes America less prosperous in the long term.
So you intend to finance the salaries of some individuals by siphoning it from the salaries of other individuals?
It's like that for every government employee.
Does the electorate have a say in how taxes are doled out?
Yes; and the electorate is pro public schools.
As far as the proliferation of armament, yes. As it concerns military personnel, not so much.
We should have less troops because soldiers kill people.
And you would have these goons and their managers regulate your children's education?
Politicians are individuals. Bernie Sanders is not pro war and this is his idea. Ron DeSantis is not pro war in Ukraine. Mike Pence and Joe Biden are. You can be against the government going to war while also wanting them to educate our kids.
If this is the case, then I'm sure there will be a market for their services in the private sector.
What if the parents can't afford to educate their kid? Is the kid to be uneducated? That's a bad recipe for society.
Public school teachers, in my opinion, are grossly overrated.
How so? They educate the kids whom the parents can't educate. I am more pro homeschool than I am pro public school (and if I had kids, they are getting homeschooled), but some parents can't homeschool their kids, so the kids should get educated by the state with your tax dollars as the alternative is kids being stupid when they grow up.
-->
@TheUnderdog
But then a lot of kids aren't going to be educated and this makes America less prosperous in the long term.
A lot of kids aren't getting educated with which to begin. They're being indoctrinated. A parent can replace a teacher or they can pay for private instruction.
It's like that for every government employee.
So you intend to finance the salaries of some individuals by siphoning it from the salaries of other individuals?
Yes; and the electorate is pro public schools.
When was the last time the military budget was reduced?
We should have less troops because soldiers kill people.
They most certainly do.
Politicians are individuals. Bernie Sanders is not pro war and this is his idea. Ron DeSantis is not pro war in Ukraine. Mike Pence and Joe Biden are. You can be against the government going to war while also wanting them to educate our kids.
Would you let the mafia or any criminal syndicate regulate and disseminate the education your children receive?
What if the parents can't afford to educate their kid?
Well, they can afford to pay taxes, correct? I promise you'll pay less for typical private instruction than you would in taxes.
They educate the kids whom the parents can't educate.
Not all instruction is beneficial.
I am more pro homeschool than I am pro public school (and if I had kids, they are getting homeschooled),
Yes, children should be either home-schooled or recipients of private instruction.
but some parents can't homeschool their kids, so the kids should get educated by the state with your tax dollars as the alternative is kids being stupid when they grow up.
First, you're suggesting that because some individuals at best had meager plans when having children, other individuals are financially responsible. Second, NOT RECEIVING A STATE EDUCATION =/= STUPID.
-->
@Athias
A lot of kids aren't getting educated with which to begin. They're being indoctrinated.
I've been through public school recently, I haven't been SUPER indoctrinated. They said political things here and there, but that's free speech. The only things I can remember is when they were trying to be more pro LGBT and when they were trying to pain the GOP as racist. Now, their arguments weren't that good; they tried comparing low taxes to racism somehow, but if you can't tolerate it, homeschool your kid. I am pro homeschooling. But some parents can't. Other that that, I don't think the class went political. It's just a few times here and there.
So you intend to finance the salaries of some individuals by siphoning it from the salaries of other individuals?
A no tax policy is not pragmatic.
When was the last time the military budget was reduced?
When was the last time the military budget was reduced?
It wasn't, and it should be cut to 1% of the GDP.
Would you let the mafia or any criminal syndicate regulate and disseminate the education your children receive?
No, but the government isn't the mafia. A no tax policy isn't pragmatic.
Well, they can afford to pay taxes, correct? I promise you'll pay less for typical private instruction than you would in taxes.
The amount of their tax bill that goes to education is less than how much education actually costs. And some people pay little in taxes, so having those people pay for education directly is going to make education unaffordable for them, so their kids don't get ANY education (private or homeschooling) and the kids become idiots when they are adults.
First, you're suggesting that because some individuals at best had meager plans when having children, other individuals are financially responsible.
There are SOME parents who can pay for their kid's education. But other parents can't, so if they don't get help, their kids become uneducated and this increases the welfare state down the line and reduces the amount of tax revenue the government can collect since salaries would be much lower. Without public school, America becomes a 3rd world country, because many 3rd world countries don't offer public school to their people.
Second, NOT RECEIVING A STATE EDUCATION =/= STUPID.
This is true, but you have to recieve some sort of education to not be stupid. And some children can't get homeschooled or private schooled. So they have to be public schooled.
-->
@TheUnderdog
I've been through public school recently, I haven't been SUPER indoctrinated.
First, why'd you qualify it with "SUPER"? Second, do the indoctrinated ever know that they're indoctrinated?
They said political things here and there, but that's free speech.
Do you pay in order to listen to their political speech?
The only things I can remember is when they were trying to be more pro LGBT and when they were trying to pain the GOP as racist.
Again, is that what you pay to read or listen to? (I'm being a bit facetious here since I'm sure we're well aware that we don't get to decide how taxes are allocated.)
But some parents can't.
This should be considered before having children.
A no tax policy is not pragmatic.
Why not?
It wasn't,
Exactly my point. The military budget hasn't been reduced. So what makes you think that the elector has a choice in how taxes are doled out?
No, but the government isn't the mafia.
The government manages a group of armed combatants who, as you claimed, are responsible for more than 17x the civilian deaths caused by ISIS in the Middle East. What is the function difference between "the government" and the mafia? Aren't taxes like "protection money" especially when you see little return if any on "investment"? Or how they murder their own for non-compliance?
And some people pay little in taxes
No one I've known who has seen their pay checks garnished by taxes have characterized it as "paying little in taxes."
so having those people pay for education directly is going to make education unaffordable for them
I can almost assure you that they'll pay less for private instruction.
so their kids don't get ANY education (private or homeschooling) and the kids become idiots when they are adults.
NOT EDUCATED BY THE STATE =/= IDIOCY.
But other parents can't, so if they don't get help, their kids become uneducated and this increases the welfare state down the line and reduces the amount of tax revenue the government can collect since salaries would be much lower.
Not if we get rid of child-labor laws. Learning a trade can be far more useful to some than spending one's mornings and afternoons in some public school facility.
Without public school, America becomes a 3rd world country
That's an exaggeration.
because many 3rd world countries don't offer public school to their people.
And yet, in my experience, many of their children have fared better in the classroom than even some of the nationals. What does that indicate?
And some children can't get homeschooled or private schooled.
Receiving private instruction doesn't necessitate going to school. One can hire a private tutor. (And I happen to be one.)
-->
@Athias
First, why'd you qualify it with "SUPER"? Second, do the indoctrinated ever know that they're indoctrinated?
When I was in high school, I was a super pro Trump guy and there was maybe 2 instances of professors teaching their opinions to the class.
Do you pay in order to listen to their political speech?
Fair point, but with classes like History (where the politics was brought up), history tends to be political, especially on racial issues, so the professor needs some sort of opinion that they state to the class. Some think racism is over in America and others disagree.
Again, is that what you pay to read or listen to? (I'm being a bit facetious here since I'm sure we're well aware that we don't get to decide how taxes are allocated.)
This was when there was no class time and I think the rest of the school went on a field trip, so there was really no point in having us learn anything useful. The alternative was a field trip.
This should be considered before having children.
What if the fertility rate plummets because parents don't want to have kids anymore because they are going to have to pay for private school for the kids? It sounds very much like how many African countries operate (and they aren't good places to live or raise a family).
A no tax policy is not pragmatic.Why not?
Because if it weren't for taxes, we would have no public schools, and if it weren't for public schools, many parents aren't going to educate their kids and then you end up with a stupid generation since they never got ANY education.
It wasn't,Exactly my point. The military budget hasn't been reduced. So what makes you think that the elector has a choice in how taxes are doled out?
The elector votes in the president. Then our politicians make laws that state where funding goes towards. Public education is needed.
What is the function difference between "the government" and the mafia?
The mafia is usually a black market military. The military is part of the government. Cut the military budget and use it to help our teachers.
No one I've known who has seen their pay checks garnished by taxes have characterized it as "paying little in taxes."
I work a job and I don't even notice the taxes coming out of my paycheck that much.
so having those people pay for education directly is going to make education unaffordable for themI can almost assure you that they'll pay less for private instruction.
How much does private school cost vs what the government spends per student in education?
NOT EDUCATED BY THE STATE =/= IDIOCY.
This is correct, but for some students, getting educated by the state is their only option.
Not if we get rid of child-labor laws. Learning a trade can be far more useful to some than spending one's mornings and afternoons in some public school facility.
I think it's okay for kids to work on the weekends, but not during the school week. Kids need to focus on their future. I am pro trade, but if everyone did trades, the trade market would be overflowed. You need a balance between trade and non trade jobs.
Without public school, America becomes a 3rd world countryThat's an exaggeration.
How so? What else made the 3rd world a bad place to live and America a good place to live?
And yet, in my experience, many of their children have fared better in the classroom than even some of the nationals. What does that indicate?
What's a national?
Receiving private instruction doesn't necessitate going to school. One can hire a private tutor. (And I happen to be one.)
Yeah, but some parents don't have the money or the connections for that.
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
Ironically my school is in the baltimore metro, i recognize that my school is above average, but it isn't anything special. there are plenty of schools that meet reasonable requirements.
"Through an analysis of 150 Baltimore City Schools, 23 of them, including 10 high schools, eight elementary schools, three high schools and two middle schools, no students met math grade-level expectations, according to a report by Project Baltimore."
I think this is just a special case, as baltimore is notoriously bad for education.
They wouldn't be. If the student doesn't turn in homework, there is nothing to grade is there? If a student doesn't ever go to the office there is no time spent is there? If the student never shows up for class, someone else can sit in his seat.It's not punishment to pay people for results. If you claim to be teaching 20 people and none of them succeed the common denominator is YOU. Or we could assume poor inner city kids are mentally deficient in which case it STILL DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO PAY SOMEONE TO TEACH THEM!
I think teachers aren't majorly to blame for performance on standardized tests. if we train teachers to only be motivated by standardized tests, we'll emphasize the wrong things in education, only caring abt whats on the test, rather than what's actually important.
in my experience, standardized tests are very easy compared to what is actually taught at school, especially in math. the SAT only covers basic algebra and geometry in its math section.