Improving Education...

The time may be right for tenure to be terminated in the public school system......

Tenure originated at universities to protect senior professors' academic freedom:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenure

The protection tenure provided  trickled down to elementary and secondary public schools
but not for the same noble reason established  for higher education.  It was solely for job
security and became a costly and time consuming burden for school administrators who
determined poor performing teachers needed to be fired.
Many school administrators found it easier to simply "move" teachers elsewhere rather
than attempt to "remove" them from the profession.

Schools throughout the country need to ask should tenure remain part of the benefit from
working in public education.

Its time to rethink the value of tenure in the public school systems vs. the cost; having
children  attend classes taught by teachers not equal to the demand of the job, and the
expense of keeping them on school payrolls.


An unintended consequence of the tenure system will the difficult task of  firing a  poor
performing teacher, s become more serious when a system of tenure
provides protection from losing their jobs without an expensive and time consuming
exercise by school administrators.

But, this cannot happen without parents demanding tenure be eliminated. If the teachers
unions balk...there are plenty of college educated unemployed individual who would gladly
take teaching positions..tenure or not.

.



With the poor performance of so many children in our public schools attention is being paid to
the many teachers who don't measure up. This  leads to the question of  WHY....why after their
formal education is completed,  certification and  post-school training do some teacher fail to
perform?
 



Perhaps its time to rethink WHY teachers should receive such a valued employment
asset the most workers do not receive.


Respected recipients,
After watching a 'Meet the Press' panel discussion on public education I came away disappointed. Nothing I heard gave me
confidence improvements will materialize without a total rethinking of structural changes.

There is widespread agreement our children are not learning enough to meet the demands of an ever changing and competitive society. They will not be prepared for the challenges that lie ahead, having gone through twelve years of schooling with little to show for the time they attended. This poor performance is occurring at a time we are spending more on education than we ever have.

So, what could be the cause(s)? Let's examine the major change which has affected public education for three decades, the creation of the Dept. of Education (DOE) in 1980.

The DOE introduced centralization of oversight and standards, formerly the responsibility of the states. With this shift came
the allure of  Federal funds if criteria was met. This incentive could be the reason so many children are getting promoted but not prepared for their next grade.  Many of our schools have been transformed into warehouses and our children human inventory with an expiration date of twelve years.

The DOE involved itself in matters beyond education. It became an arm of the Justice Dept. measuring racial makeup in schools, and moving children between schools to ensure diversity objectives were achieved as well as "padding" stats to falsely portray schools were achieving performance goals to receive funds.

With this centralization came the influence of special interests; children "rights" groups, and racial diversity interests. Also,
classroom size limits, narrow minded & single-thinking curriculum, political correctness and partisanship played a role.

We also saw a growth of the influence of teacher's union at the national level coinciding with the establishment of the DOE. Its lobby found a willing ally in Congress and used campaign contribution to promote favorable legislation, favorable for teachers.

Are the problems of poor performance, drop outs and discipline greater today than they were prior to the creation of the DOE and the strengthening of union influence? If so, than we cannot dismiss the creation of the DOE as the cause, at least partially.
Its time the states regain the responsibility for public education they had prior to the creation of the DOE, and rely on their own legislatures to set the educational standards...It worked for our 100 years and it can work again.

Without a discussion of what role the DOE has played in the failures in our pubic schools we may never resolve the problems.      
Regards,
Anthony Bruno     

Selected audience,
To no ones surprise  public education is receiving failing grades and is once again in the cross hairs  of government, the media and the public, all interested in addressing the problems which have led to the poor performance of so many children.

Blame needs to be shared by the poor performing students themselves, their parents &  teachers , the teacher's unions, school administers
and government...including the Dept. of Education.

Right now teacher's unions are receiving much of the attention, in no small measure due to the salaries and  benefits including tenure 
unique to teaching profession and found no where in the private sector.

This may not seem fair to single out teachers and their  unions but when ten percent of Americans are unemployed, most states and
local government are deeply in debt, and the Federal government continuing to borrow, it is easy to understand why.

So, fair or not, the focus is on teachers, what the earn, the influence of their unions and the impact on the education of children.

Most Americans will have little sympathy for teachers considering on average they receive salaries, benefits  and guaranteed positions
thanks to tenure.

Now seems to be the appropriate time local and state governments revisit the contract arrangements  with teachers. Citizens can no longer afford to pay teachers or any public employee a wage/benefit package out of kilter of what the private sector pays.

There is much more to be done, but this would be huge first step...
Regards,
Anthony Bruno


Members of the board,
Ever since the establishment of the Dept. of Education (DOE) Administrations have prided themselves on educational
programs, many with catchy names . The latest is "Race to the Top", a Federal program which provides funds to states
meeting goals of the program.

On the surface this appears to be a positive program, encouraging schools to improve the performance of their students.
But a down side to the involvement of the DOE is the intrusion on the role of the states, which have primary responsibility
for public education. Yet we rarely hear this as a cause of concern as the lure of Federal funds to cash-strapped states
leave them little choice but adhere to Federal dictates.

We have even seen inducements lead some schools to take extraordinary steps to raise average scores to qualify, while
masking the poor performance of the weakest students who do not improve.

Going further, why do we presume the people at the DOE are better qualified to develop initiatives than educators at the
state and local  levels. It may be more than a coincidence that since its inception in 1980 drop out rates  have gone up
and  student performance down.

Its time for the states to partition Congress to limit the authority of the DOE to one of a supportive body, rather than one
which doles out  money for compliance to federally created standards.

Your thoughts....

"Poverty's place in the school debate"

In their commentary Robert Korstad of Duke, and James Leloudis of UNC stated that by moving students between schools children formally in poor performing schools would receive a better education. They also state the "socioeconomic diversity" previously gained has now been lost.

Their commentary is more about the overall problems faced by the poor, such as 'economic justice', than the education their children receive. I believe our public schools have enough on their plate just providing quality education.

The professors state the new board "turned their backs" on social justice and democracy. But, is that the role of a school board?                       

     If so, no need for courts.

I disagree with their conclusion the "problems of poverty and inequality" are at the heart of the controversy. This is the leap they make,          without taking measure of the effectiveness of the schools where children are performing poorly.
As a parent and grandparent I believe schools should teach and children should learn....period. And if either of these two objectives                    are not met, direct, corrective measures need to be taken.
If it is proven the quality of the instruction falls short, strengthen the teaching, and if children are falling behind,  modify the curriculum                     to ensure students learn before being 'promoted' to next grade.
And, if it is demonstrated that poor performing schools are not receiving the same amount of funding (which I have not seen) than the                  board should rectify this.
The professors went on to state poor people "lack the political power"! Really?  The largest, galvanized voting block is made up of minority organizations, invaluably serving tens of millions of Americans. So they are represented, as evidenced by the varied organizations who     attended the recent board meeting, many from outside the county.

We even have Congressional districts deliberately gerrymandered to ensure minorities are the majority. In fact, the average longest terms
in Congress are held by minority members!

The professors are correct, many poor families cannot afford some school programs or extra-curricular activities, but this is not something     public schools need to provide, especially with budget constraints.  At some point, the responsibility falls on the parents. The public can not         and should not be asked (even demanded) to pay for anything most citizens pay for themselves.

While the professors, as well as the News and Observer editorial staff, criticize the board for fulfilling their commitment to the                          people who elected them, I've yet to see any serious changes being proposed to improve poor performing schools, only move them elsewhere.

So, here is a suggestion...Stop looking children's skin color, their parents income and the communities they live in.  Focus on
what schools can do, not where students attend their classes.

Once this is done, attention can then be paid to the issue that the board has honed in on, ensuring each student gets educated.

It took seven months for the N&O to have even a tepid admission that diversity was "fraying around the edges" 
To many, diversity is a useful diversion promoted to fix a problem through the shifting of children rather than providing quality education.

Its a solution by people whose only expertise is shaking govt "money tree" as hard and often as they can to get as much in funding
to spend as they see fit.

Decades of failure mean little to these people, as long as they shout how much they "care" whatever they say indisputable, as they reach into the wallet if taxpayers.
At one time I wondered how a a newspaper with little if any competition would not grow as the the area it serves has grown.

But, I think I figured it out...the same folks writing the editorials also make the business decisions...guess they are hoping
for govt funds too.