Education Thread

[Lennys Tap]

Except that, when controlling for socioeconomic status, studies show there is no benefit to private schools vs public schools.  Socioeconomic status and parental involvement are the two biggest factors in how a child does in school.

I'd actually go the other way, increasing public school funding.  Lengthen the school year and get creative.

More field trips, especially museums and exposure to the arts.  Real life skills classes, like finances, how to apply to college and for financial aid, how to right a resume, how to dress for a job interview.

More teachers, better teachers, smaller class sizes, and special classrooms for at risk students that are failing to achieve success in school.  Make public schools better for all.

I'm not sure what you mean when you say "no benefit" to private schools vs public schools, but I assume you mean when eliminating certain factors they produce similar results.

But they don't spend nearly the same amount per student for equal results. CPS spends $13,433 per student, Chicago charter schools spend $11,400 and Chicago Catholic schools $7557. Why pour more money into the organization that's the least efficient in spending the resources they have?

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

My solution, to the extent that there is one, would start with the expansion of choice - vouchers, tax credits, even local co-ops that might serve the community (at least segments of it) better than the present system. The public school system is a reality that will never be undone regardless of my thoughts on the issue. More competition to rather than more money for a system producing poor results seems logical to me - especially when the failing system operates under a conflict of interest where teacher's rights/benefits supersede student's performance.

I mentioned this before but I love the idea of choice schools. It should work. But so far, it doesn't. I got my masters degree in education from a school in Michigan. I got to see firsthand what some of Devos' schools are like. Most of them are awful. Subpar facilities, subpar teachers, no support structure, and a curriculum that does not match state requirements, is flawed, and often very selective in what is taught and that is motivated by personal politics. I'm not willing to throw out the idea of choice schools. They should work in theory. I think they just need the proper oversight to make it happen.

[Pakuni]

I'm not sure what you mean when you say "no benefit" to private schools vs public schools, but I assume you mean when eliminating certain factors they produce similar results.

But they don't spend nearly the same amount per student for equal results. CPS spends $13,433 per student, Chicago charter schools spend $11,400 and Chicago Catholic schools $7557. Why pour more money into the organization that's the least efficient in spending the resources they have?

One of the primary reasons public schools spend more per pupil is because, unlike private schools, they don't have a choice of which students they accept and are mandated to perform a host of services private schools do not.
Private schools, for example, don't have to take kids with special needs that require a full-time teacher's aide in the classroom and the development of intensive individual education plans to guide them through school.
Private schools don't have to accommodate kids with physical disabilities that require aides and classroom modifications.
Private schools don't have to take on kids with learning disabilities that require additional staff and services.
Private schools don't have to fund "alternative" schools for kids with behavioral issues.
Private schools don't have to pay to transport their students to and from school.
I could go on, I'm sure.

If it appears for any reason that educating a kid is going to require an additional expenditure of time or money, a private school simply refuses admission or kindly asks his/her parents to go away. I've seen this happen at private schools I attended and the one my kids attend. This isn't because those school officials are cruel. It's because they run on extremely tight budgets and can't afford kids whose education costs twice that of a more typical student.
Public schools don't have that choice. They're lawfully mandated to educate every student, no matter what the cost.

You're correct that there are inefficiencies in the public school system. Lots of them. But juxtaposing the per pupil costs of public schools vs private schools is a bad comparison because it's nowhere close to apples to oranges.

And one of the biggest problems with the voucher system is it takes the funding for the least costly students away from the public schools, leaving those schools to educate the most expensive kids with even fewer resources.

[MUBurrow]

nm

[Spotcheck Billy]

One of the primary reasons public schools spend more per pupil is because, unlike private schools, they don't have a choice of which students they accept and are mandated to perform a host of services private schools do not.
Private schools, for example, don't have to take kids with special needs that require a full-time teacher's aide in the classroom and the development of intensive individual education plans to guide them through school.
Private schools don't have to accommodate kids with physical disabilities that require aides and classroom modifications.
Private schools don't have to take on kids with learning disabilities that require additional staff and services.
Private schools don't have to fund "alternative" schools for kids with behavioral issues.
Private schools don't have to pay to transport their students to and from school.
I could go on, I'm sure.

If it appears for any reason that educating a kid is going to require an additional expenditure of time or money, a private school simply refuses admission or kindly asks his/her parents to go away. I've seen this happen at private schools I attended and the one my kids attend. This isn't because those school officials are cruel. It's because they run on extremely tight budgets and can't afford kids whose education costs twice that of a more typical student.
Public schools don't have that choice. They're lawfully mandated to educate every student, no matter what the cost.

You're correct that there are inefficiencies in the public school system. Lots of them. But juxtaposing the per pupil costs of public schools vs private schools is a bad comparison because it's nowhere close to apples to oranges.

And one of the biggest problems with the voucher system is it takes the funding for the least costly students away from the public schools, leaving those schools to educate the most expensive kids with even fewer resources.

One of the primary reasons public schools spend more per pupil is because teacher pensions aren't cheap.

[Pakuni]

One of the primary reasons public schools spend more per pupil is because teacher pensions aren't cheap.

Actually, most teacher pensions (at least in my state) are funded almost entirely by the state and employee contributions. The school districts themselves - other than Chicago Public Schools - contribute very little. CPS funds its pensions itself, without state funding.
And, keep in mind, those teachers do not receive Social Security benefits. That is a huge cost savings for the districts ... far larger than the amount they contribute to the pension system.
So, you're entirely wrong.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Actually, most teacher pensions (at least in my state) are funded almost entirely by the state and employee contributions. The school districts themselves - other than Chicago Public Schools - contribute very little. CPS funds its pensions itself, without state funding.
And, keep in mind, those teachers do not receive Social Security benefits. That is a huge cost savings for the districts ... far larger than the amount they contribute to the pension system.
So, you're entirely wrong.

Same in Texas.

I dont think there are very many overpaid teachers in the USA.

[warriorchick]

Same in Texas.

I dont think there are very many overpaid teachers in the USA.

Many bad teachers are overpaid; many good teachers are underpaid. 

[Lennys Tap]

One of the primary reasons public schools spend more per pupil is because, unlike private schools, they don't have a choice of which students they accept and are mandated to perform a host of services private schools do not.
Private schools, for example, don't have to take kids with special needs that require a full-time teacher's aide in the classroom and the development of intensive individual education plans to guide them through school.
Private schools don't have to accommodate kids with physical disabilities that require aides and classroom modifications.
Private schools don't have to take on kids with learning disabilities that require additional staff and services.
Private schools don't have to fund "alternative" schools for kids with behavioral issues.
Private schools don't have to pay to transport their students to and from school.
I could go on, I'm sure.

If it appears for any reason that educating a kid is going to require an additional expenditure of time or money, a private school simply refuses admission or kindly asks his/her parents to go away. I've seen this happen at private schools I attended and the one my kids attend. This isn't because those school officials are cruel. It's because they run on extremely tight budgets and can't afford kids whose education costs twice that of a more typical student.
Public schools don't have that choice. They're lawfully mandated to educate every student, no matter what the cost.

You're correct that there are inefficiencies in the public school system. Lots of them. But juxtaposing the per pupil costs of public schools vs private schools is a bad comparison because it's nowhere close to apples to oranges.

And one of the biggest problems with the voucher system is it takes the funding for the least costly students away from the public schools, leaving those schools to educate the most expensive kids with even fewer resources.

Your right that public/private isn't an exact apples to apples comp. Some of the additional $6000 per student per year legit. How much I don't know.

But private schools have much lower administrative overhead and lower teacher salaries and benefits. And many non teaching positions are manned by volunteers rather than paid staff. Lots of cuts to non essentials, too. They do what they need to do in order to survive. Public schools don't need to be efficient for survival.

Regarding charter schools (15% less expensive in Chicago than CPS), do they reject special needs children? Asking because I don't know.

[Lennys Tap]

I mentioned this before but I love the idea of choice schools. It should work. But so far, it doesn't. I got my masters degree in education from a school in Michigan. I got to see firsthand what some of Devos' schools are like. Most of them are awful. Subpar facilities, subpar teachers, no support structure, and a curriculum that does not match state requirements, is flawed, and often very selective in what is taught and that is motivated by personal politics. I'm not willing to throw out the idea of choice schools. They should work in theory. I think they just need the proper oversight to make it happen.

In urban areas charter schools already outperform their public school counterparts. Students on average gain 40 days in math and 28 days in reading. Results aren't nearly as good in non urban areas, but they're not really the focus of our discussion.

[forgetful]

In urban areas charter schools already outperform their public school counterparts. Students on average gain 40 days in math and 28 days in reading. Results aren't nearly as good in non urban areas, but they're not really the focus of our discussion.

You are cherry picking studies.  Many studies come to opposite conclusions, and nationwide averages say otherwise. 

Nationwide and in most metro areas, the expenditures for charter schools, christian schools, independent schools are as much or more than the expenditures for public schools.  Also, the actual performance of students is lower than at public schools.  The biggest differences is variability in expenditures and performance from school to school.

The best private schools indeed due often perform better, but they will also spend sometimes double or more per student than public schools.  The bottom line is if you use nationwide averages, you find you get what you paid for, and public schools are as or more efficient. 

For Charter schools you also see statistics in performance boosted, because they do not have to accept everyone and often cherry pick the students that they know will perform better...already proven high performing students.  That way the can tout better success numbers and charge more money for what is actually a subpar education. 

[Lennys Tap]

You are cherry picking studies.  Many studies come to opposite conclusions, and nationwide averages say otherwise. 

Nationwide and in most metro areas, the expenditures for charter schools, christian schools, independent schools are as much or more than the expenditures for public schools.  Also, the actual performance of students is lower than at public schools.  The biggest differences is variability in expenditures and performance from school to school.

The best private schools indeed due often perform better, but they will also spend sometimes double or more per student than public schools.  The bottom line is if you use nationwide averages, you find you get what you paid for, and public schools are as or more efficient. 

For Charter schools you also see statistics in performance boosted, because they do not have to accept everyone and often cherry pick the students that they know will perform better...already proven high performing students.  That way the can tout better success numbers and charge more money for what is actually a subpar education.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/commentary/ct-charter-schools-public-teachers-unions-20161015-story.html

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Many bad teachers are overpaid; many good teachers are underpaid.

Fair. But honestly, I think many of the bad teachers are paid just about right. That's how underpaid teachers are in most places in this country.

[mu_hilltopper]

(I split the minimum wage thread as it had moved to Education.. not all ed posts got here, though.)

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

(I split the minimum wage thread as it had moved to Education.. not all ed posts got here, though.)

Gerrymandering!

Just kidding.

[warriorchick]

Fair. But honestly, I think many of the bad teachers are paid just about right. That's how underpaid teachers are in most places in this country.

Seriously?  In a system where it is almost impossible to get fired if you are an ineffective or even harmful teacher, where despite your results you are guaranteed to get a raise every year per your union contract?

[Spotcheck Billy]

there's a website where you can look up the compensation for any MPS teachers, people I know are shown to be receiving approximately $100K in total compensation, not bad for seasonal work.

[MerrittsMustache]

Fair. But honestly, I think many of the bad teachers are paid just about right. That's how underpaid teachers are in most places in this country.

Bad teachers should be paid at all. They should be let go, just like other people who are ineffective at their jobs. Unfortunately, unions don't allow this to happen.

The average public school teacher's salary in the US is $50k (as of 2013). That's right about the national average and only requires going to work 9 months of the year. The problem with teachers' salaries is that they're largely based on years of service, earning a Master's degree, completing certain certifications, etc. Very little of it has to do with their actual ability to teach.

[warriorchick]

Bad teachers should be paid at all. They should be let go, just like other people who are ineffective at their jobs. Unfortunately, unions don't allow this to happen.

The average public school teacher's salary in the US is $50k (as of 2013). That's right about the national average and only requires going to work 9 months of the year. The problem with teachers' salaries is that they're largely based on years of service, earning a Master's degree, completing certain certifications, etc. Very little of it has to do with their actual ability to teach.

In my neck of the woods their are plenty of teachers who are in the six figures, including Drivers Ed teachers. 

[Jockey]

Many bad teachers are overpaid; many good teachers are underpaid.

Many bad cops are overpaid; many good cops are underpaid.

Many bad plumbers are overpaid; many good plumbers are underpaid.

Many bad nurses are overpaid; many good nurses are underpaid.

Many bad soldiers are overpaid; many good soldiers are underpaid.

Etc.

Etc.

Etc.

[Juan Anderson's Mixtape]

I'm not sure what you mean when you say "no benefit" to private schools vs public schools, but I assume you mean when eliminating certain factors they produce similar results.

But they don't spend nearly the same amount per student for equal results. CPS spends $13,433 per student, Chicago charter schools spend $11,400 and Chicago Catholic schools $7557. Why pour more money into the organization that's the least efficient in spending the resources they have?

By no benefit, I mean that public schools and private schools made up of roughly the same demographics will perform about the same.  Here are a couple thought exercises:

Scenario 1

Public School A vs Private School B have similar socioeconomic and racial demographics (most important being the socioeconomic factor).  These schools would perform roughly the same.

Scenario 2

Public School A has more poor students and minorities than Private School B (with socioeconomic status still being most important factor).  In the first semester, Private School B out performs Public School A.  At semester break, the schools do a complete 100% student swap.  In the second semester, Public School A would out perform Private School B.

So the benefit of private schools isn't better education but a better environment.  Tuition acts as a gate keeper that separates the wheat from the chafe.  But not all private schools are created equally.  There are good ones and bad ones, just as there are for public schools.

[Jockey]

Your right that public/private isn't an exact apples to apples comp. Some of the additional $6000 per student per year legit. How much I don't know.

But private schools have much lower administrative overhead and lower teacher salaries and benefits. And many non teaching positions are manned by volunteers rather than paid staff. Lots of cuts to non essentials, too. They do what they need to do in order to survive. Public schools don't need to be efficient for survival.

You never disappoint me, Lenny.   I just knew it would come down to a Union thing.

Maybe we can take away the teacher's insurance. That would save us all money.

[Juan Anderson's Mixtape]

The Madison Metropolitan School District is a good example of how a public school's success can be affected by poverty.  The WI Department of Instruction 2015-16 grades for the public high schools:

Madison West
Overall Score: 78.5 (Exceeds Expectations)
Economically Disadvantaged Students: 35.8%

Madison Memorial
Overall Score: 65.5 (Meets Expectations)
Economically Disadvantaged Students: 35.4%

Madison East
Overall Score: 54.7 (Meets Few Expectations)
Economically Disadvantaged Students: 58.4%

Madison Lafollette
Overall Score: 51.6 (Fails to Meet Expectations)
Economically Disadvantaged Students: 57.1%

It should be noted that Madison West is located right next to the UW campus and near the UW hospital.  Property in this sub-district is more expensive.  They're are also a lot students that have professors, nurses, or doctors.  For full report cards see here:

https://apps2.dpi.wi.gov/reportcards/

[jficke13]

Many bad cops are overpaid; many good cops are underpaid.

Many bad plumbers are overpaid; many good plumbers are underpaid.

Many bad nurses are overpaid; many good nurses are underpaid.

Many bad soldiers are overpaid; many good soldiers are underpaid.

Etc.

Etc.

Etc.

... I'm pretty sure that was her point...

[mu_hilltopper]

there's a website where you can look up the compensation for any MPS teachers, people I know are shown to be receiving approximately $100K in total compensation, not bad for seasonal work.

Always amazing how when people talk about public sector employees, we always tend to talk about "total compensation," always making sure to include every penny of benefits.

"That 20 year veteran teacher with her masters is compensated $100k/year" sure sounds richer than "$68k/year + benefits."