I think the most important thing in education is the learning experience. Many schools and universities worldwide offer accredited courses, however, the difference is the learning experience.
The learning experience is determined by many factors like environment, teachers, peers, and location. While some factors are out of our control, the teachers can make all the difference. Delivering a class learning experience that engages all students is vital. Not all teachers aim for that since the education system doesn’t have clear criteria to measure that.
Technologies like blockchain play a major role in transforming the learning process. Since blockchain is an immutable and secure ledger of interactions between different parties, teachers will change the way they approach education.
Smart contracts are self-executing computer programs that have useful applications in education. For example, when a student enrolls in a course and completes it, smart contracts will only release funds to the institution after the student confirms he received the expected value. The student will have the chance to evaluate his learning experience.
Other applications of smart contracts involve credentials verification and academic record traceability. These applications eliminate fraud and cheating. Currently, there’s a handful of decentralized education projects like Forward Protocol. This project has five smart contracts that govern the interaction between students and teachers. Soon it will launch on English Forward website where existing students, teachers, and tutors partake in.
The article on The Public School Crisis: Higher Payrolls . . . was very interesting. In order to fully react to this research I would want to hear directly from other sources that might better be able to respond to its authors. So, I would like to see a response from leaders of AFT or education experts like author, Diane Ravitch. If you do take the time to reach out for that kind of response, let me know of their reaction.
Here's a look at education industry pay in California, based on actual compensation records as well. It's a few years old but all the elements are the same, the numbers are just bigger now.
There is a hidden multiplier effect at work here. When the school board hires an educational consultant or other expert that person spends several hours each day, and usually a day or two each month, connecting with people who work in the schools – taking up their time. Similarly, when the school hires an admin expert of some kind that person has to spend time with teachers, taking up their time.
The effect varies with the level at which the administrative person is hired – at the school level a new admin role may take up around one teacher FTE for every 30 teachers in the school, but if hired at the board level that same admin person probably creates one additional admin FTE for every three or four schools, and at least one teacher FTE for every 30 or so teachers in the system.
There is also a lag effect. An admin hired partway through the school year will have an immediate effect on teacher time and so quite probably on student achievement while the FTE and related costs effects will not really show up until the next budget year. As a result, the negative effects of admin bloat – usually in response to external pressures – will penalize students first and rate payers a second.
BOTTOM LINE: Parents are NOT participating enough in their children's education.
FUNDING: Give property tax breaks to teachers (and law enforcement) who live in the County they teach in. A tax cut is better than more spending. After all, where do the salaries originate. Government employee funding is a Ponzi scheme.
I am looking at it from the retention perspective. School Boards would no longer have to ask for more money for teachers. It's a quick way to give law enforcement a pay boost as well. I'm in favor of tax reductions.
Do you have stats on the effect of pay increases on retention?
Getting school districts to produce actual data on turnover is nearly impossible. I know, I've tried.
Any private industry that claimed to have to raise salaries to retain quality employees would be required to substantiate that with data showing that employees were leaving for more lucrative options elsewhere (usually done via exit interviews.)
Schools don't do that. They just say "we need to increase pay to retain good teachers" and everyone just accepts that - because the myth of the underpaid teacher is so pervasive that it's just accepted as truth.
In reality, in the cases where I HAVE been able to obtain turnover data, what you find is that turnover in schools is lower than almost any private industry job, and that turnover is mostly focused on entry-level starting teachers. Veteran teachers NEVER leave for more money anywhere else (in part because union-negotiated rules make them step back in the salary schedule if they do.)
If you were the CEO and I told you I needed to take millions from things that benefit our customers to give to employees "because I heard somewhere that good ones might leave" you would laugh me out of the office.
Let's see some data showing there are any problems anywhere in education with retention of senior teachers.
Thanks for the data. We're really on the same page. Even Open The Books didn't have the full data I needed. I figured that the "plea" for retention is a con job long ago. I was merely suggesting an alternative to just passing pay increases and try something new. Boards of Education are even targeting "senior" voters with the tagline "No tax increases for seniors due to homestead exemptions". Causes those voters to stay home from the ballot box and increase "yes" votes.
Bloated administration staff leads to collective responsibility. That means little attention to teachers, teacher development and student progress. The admin does not care about students but cares about the head count and their budget. As a consequence incompetent teachers continue on. Aside from union protection from firing little help arrives to improve teaching. Then money is spent on nice things rather than school student workbooks.
Watching the cycle of “evidence based” contracted educational material has been an issue. Changing every few years depending on which company manages to whisper management their better kits. Possibly some side graft at work - gifts, meals. But teachers are locked into that curriculum. Not allowed to deviate despite watching it fail in the classroom. OTOH perhaps helpful to less skilled teachers.
Meanwhile teachers are faced with socializing some youth who have lost boundaries. Often that drives out the dedicated soul who cares but is frustrated by the lack of admin supports. The admin passes the buck among their staff with little being done.
Money can’t fix the issue of lousy management. More money increases the bloat. School choice seems the only way to break the system.
How do you arrive at such a conclusion? Republicans seem to want more school choice options while democrats aligned with teacher unions oppose that. Besides the article avoided the red/blue stuff.
Most republicans I know are for minimal but effective management which seems to be ignored for schools.
The fundamental problem with much of the public sector is that there's no real relationship between funding and outcomes. A business with a poor service or product requesting more money from its customers would be laughed out of the room. In the public sector, it's often used as the rationale for why even more money is needed.
Imagine if the superintendents of our school districts had personal skin in the game of improvement - as every CEO of a business in private industry has.
Apparently we really want to incentivize the guy who makes fig newtons to do it well, but we don't give a fig about the education of our kids...
In Idaho, this November will see many supplemental property tax levies on the ballot. We say VOTE NO!
Idaho, like other states mentioned in this post, has seen flat or falling test stores along with vastly expanded state spending for public education and its corporate welfare Idaho Launch post-secondary program (all this spending in addition to the local tax levies).
Home schooling and other non-public options offer a far better bang for the buck.
Voters and legislators must wise up and soon before education quality falls further, public school spending continues to skyrocket, and parents pull their kids out of failing, woke schools that depend on kids in seats for their funding.
(Portland, OR also is spending vast sums to remodel its high schools with gold plated everything and far more capacity than they will need.)
Look at the fallout of worthless educators! It is time for all educators and public servants across our nation to take a civics class and be randomly tested on an annual basis. There must be an American flag in every classroom, with the pledge of alligence recited before further agenda. We must demand allegence to our constitutional laws by every human living in our great Rebublic. NO EXCUSES!
Too much money goes to administrators. Too many teachers are indoctrinating students, not teaching but preaching gender ideology and rot. Our children learn little in ways of critical thinking. Vote NO every time there is a school bond. Money is not the problem.
This is the most irresponsible so called research I have read. It has no scientific foundation behind the analysis presented - I honestly have to say I am astounded that this was even printed in this forum. It does not do anything to represent good research and finding solutions to the many problems in the public school system at this time.
Seems that majority of these top salaries are in Red states, includes many Chapter Schools that have relatively less students than public. Perhaps these positions are political favors and not based on merit. Unfortunately this high salaries do affect perception from people, thinking that teachers are making lots of money, but it is not the case.
The role of the pandemic in scores and funding during this period is so under represented and discussed it’s hard to place any value on the report.
I think the most important thing in education is the learning experience. Many schools and universities worldwide offer accredited courses, however, the difference is the learning experience.
The learning experience is determined by many factors like environment, teachers, peers, and location. While some factors are out of our control, the teachers can make all the difference. Delivering a class learning experience that engages all students is vital. Not all teachers aim for that since the education system doesn’t have clear criteria to measure that.
Technologies like blockchain play a major role in transforming the learning process. Since blockchain is an immutable and secure ledger of interactions between different parties, teachers will change the way they approach education.
Smart contracts are self-executing computer programs that have useful applications in education. For example, when a student enrolls in a course and completes it, smart contracts will only release funds to the institution after the student confirms he received the expected value. The student will have the chance to evaluate his learning experience.
Other applications of smart contracts involve credentials verification and academic record traceability. These applications eliminate fraud and cheating. Currently, there’s a handful of decentralized education projects like Forward Protocol. This project has five smart contracts that govern the interaction between students and teachers. Soon it will launch on English Forward website where existing students, teachers, and tutors partake in.
Why are people who condone & in some cases promote assassinations TEACHING OUR CHILDREN?
The article on The Public School Crisis: Higher Payrolls . . . was very interesting. In order to fully react to this research I would want to hear directly from other sources that might better be able to respond to its authors. So, I would like to see a response from leaders of AFT or education experts like author, Diane Ravitch. If you do take the time to reach out for that kind of response, let me know of their reaction.
Great work, as always.
Here's a look at education industry pay in California, based on actual compensation records as well. It's a few years old but all the elements are the same, the numbers are just bigger now.
https://blog.transparentcalifornia.com/how-much-are-california-k-12-employees-really-paid/
There is a hidden multiplier effect at work here. When the school board hires an educational consultant or other expert that person spends several hours each day, and usually a day or two each month, connecting with people who work in the schools – taking up their time. Similarly, when the school hires an admin expert of some kind that person has to spend time with teachers, taking up their time.
The effect varies with the level at which the administrative person is hired – at the school level a new admin role may take up around one teacher FTE for every 30 teachers in the school, but if hired at the board level that same admin person probably creates one additional admin FTE for every three or four schools, and at least one teacher FTE for every 30 or so teachers in the system.
There is also a lag effect. An admin hired partway through the school year will have an immediate effect on teacher time and so quite probably on student achievement while the FTE and related costs effects will not really show up until the next budget year. As a result, the negative effects of admin bloat – usually in response to external pressures – will penalize students first and rate payers a second.
BOTTOM LINE: Parents are NOT participating enough in their children's education.
FUNDING: Give property tax breaks to teachers (and law enforcement) who live in the County they teach in. A tax cut is better than more spending. After all, where do the salaries originate. Government employee funding is a Ponzi scheme.
"Give property tax breaks". Why? Why do they deserve it more than any other worthy profession? And why do we care where they live?
If Albert Einstein applied to teach math in California, would you say "you're not qualified because you live in New Jersey?"
I am looking at it from the retention perspective. School Boards would no longer have to ask for more money for teachers. It's a quick way to give law enforcement a pay boost as well. I'm in favor of tax reductions.
Do you have stats on the effect of pay increases on retention?
Getting school districts to produce actual data on turnover is nearly impossible. I know, I've tried.
Any private industry that claimed to have to raise salaries to retain quality employees would be required to substantiate that with data showing that employees were leaving for more lucrative options elsewhere (usually done via exit interviews.)
Schools don't do that. They just say "we need to increase pay to retain good teachers" and everyone just accepts that - because the myth of the underpaid teacher is so pervasive that it's just accepted as truth.
In reality, in the cases where I HAVE been able to obtain turnover data, what you find is that turnover in schools is lower than almost any private industry job, and that turnover is mostly focused on entry-level starting teachers. Veteran teachers NEVER leave for more money anywhere else (in part because union-negotiated rules make them step back in the salary schedule if they do.)
If you were the CEO and I told you I needed to take millions from things that benefit our customers to give to employees "because I heard somewhere that good ones might leave" you would laugh me out of the office.
Let's see some data showing there are any problems anywhere in education with retention of senior teachers.
Thanks for the data. We're really on the same page. Even Open The Books didn't have the full data I needed. I figured that the "plea" for retention is a con job long ago. I was merely suggesting an alternative to just passing pay increases and try something new. Boards of Education are even targeting "senior" voters with the tagline "No tax increases for seniors due to homestead exemptions". Causes those voters to stay home from the ballot box and increase "yes" votes.
Yes, we are on the same page then.
If you're interested in an analysis of teacher pay in California...
https://blog.transparentcalifornia.com/how-much-are-california-k-12-employees-really-paid/
Bloated administration staff leads to collective responsibility. That means little attention to teachers, teacher development and student progress. The admin does not care about students but cares about the head count and their budget. As a consequence incompetent teachers continue on. Aside from union protection from firing little help arrives to improve teaching. Then money is spent on nice things rather than school student workbooks.
Watching the cycle of “evidence based” contracted educational material has been an issue. Changing every few years depending on which company manages to whisper management their better kits. Possibly some side graft at work - gifts, meals. But teachers are locked into that curriculum. Not allowed to deviate despite watching it fail in the classroom. OTOH perhaps helpful to less skilled teachers.
Meanwhile teachers are faced with socializing some youth who have lost boundaries. Often that drives out the dedicated soul who cares but is frustrated by the lack of admin supports. The admin passes the buck among their staff with little being done.
Money can’t fix the issue of lousy management. More money increases the bloat. School choice seems the only way to break the system.
How do you arrive at such a conclusion? Republicans seem to want more school choice options while democrats aligned with teacher unions oppose that. Besides the article avoided the red/blue stuff.
Most republicans I know are for minimal but effective management which seems to be ignored for schools.
stats for Canada?
The fundamental problem with much of the public sector is that there's no real relationship between funding and outcomes. A business with a poor service or product requesting more money from its customers would be laughed out of the room. In the public sector, it's often used as the rationale for why even more money is needed.
Imagine if the superintendents of our school districts had personal skin in the game of improvement - as every CEO of a business in private industry has.
Apparently we really want to incentivize the guy who makes fig newtons to do it well, but we don't give a fig about the education of our kids...
https://sandiegoschools.net/articles/superpay
In Idaho, this November will see many supplemental property tax levies on the ballot. We say VOTE NO!
Idaho, like other states mentioned in this post, has seen flat or falling test stores along with vastly expanded state spending for public education and its corporate welfare Idaho Launch post-secondary program (all this spending in addition to the local tax levies).
Two report cards for Idaho:
- https://www.sde.idaho.gov/assessment/report-card.html
- https://www.idahoreportcard.org/
Home schooling and other non-public options offer a far better bang for the buck.
Voters and legislators must wise up and soon before education quality falls further, public school spending continues to skyrocket, and parents pull their kids out of failing, woke schools that depend on kids in seats for their funding.
(Portland, OR also is spending vast sums to remodel its high schools with gold plated everything and far more capacity than they will need.)
Look at the fallout of worthless educators! It is time for all educators and public servants across our nation to take a civics class and be randomly tested on an annual basis. There must be an American flag in every classroom, with the pledge of alligence recited before further agenda. We must demand allegence to our constitutional laws by every human living in our great Rebublic. NO EXCUSES!
Too much money goes to administrators. Too many teachers are indoctrinating students, not teaching but preaching gender ideology and rot. Our children learn little in ways of critical thinking. Vote NO every time there is a school bond. Money is not the problem.
This is the most irresponsible so called research I have read. It has no scientific foundation behind the analysis presented - I honestly have to say I am astounded that this was even printed in this forum. It does not do anything to represent good research and finding solutions to the many problems in the public school system at this time.
They clearly give you their sources of data, do you simply want to deny it because you don't like what that data shows?
Seems that majority of these top salaries are in Red states, includes many Chapter Schools that have relatively less students than public. Perhaps these positions are political favors and not based on merit. Unfortunately this high salaries do affect perception from people, thinking that teachers are making lots of money, but it is not the case.