With all due respect, you should have paid more attention during grammar lessons. There are too many errors in this post for someone of your educational longevity. Did you write a rough draft first or just punch some keys to see what would come out? If you want to defend the public school system, the least you could have done is check your work. Oh well...I suppose you'll blame it on your conservative teachers.

Wow! Stunning analysis.

You cast a huge net to blame Republicans for your woes.

How about taking responsibility for your own actions and accept consequences. Perhaps both democrats and republicans want to learn in school.

Competition between schools is a great way to increase the quality of students and teachers. To equate competition between schools to a random change of DNA over time is ridiculous. Just because you wanted to say the word Darwin (even twice) does not mean you understand pedegogy, meiosis, macro economics or education.

What credentials does a person have to have to write a blog? Apparently not much...

Stunning analysis indeed.

It hurts me to agree with someone who once claimed that racism ended with the Emancipation Proclamation, but I've got to hand it to cow rancher here.

Are Mr. Landry's posts to be taken seriously?

Garth,

I never said racism ended with the Emancipation Proclamation. You must have confused me with someone else. I think this administration is the most racist we've had since the 19th century. It's good to see we have some common ground though.

Mr. F,

There are lots of data supporting that competition between schools increases the quality of students and teachers. I will look up some factual data but first I would like to pose a couple of examples I've witnessed. For example, which teacher would you rather have your child learn under: A teacher (A) who is a couple years from retirement that passes out worksheets waiting for the clock to hit dismissal time or a teacher (B) who lectures and uses inquiry and discovery in their pedegogy that truly is a partner with the parents in the education of the child?

Under the current system of public schools, the first teacher (A) I mentioned makes over $60,000 per year. The second, more interactive teacher makes just over $30,000 (B)per year due to having less tenure (thank you unions!). If schools would compete for the best teachers, then I contend students would learn more from the more progressive school. While some tenured teachers will be offended at my comments, there are many tenured teachers who also teach like teacher B and deserve every penny they get and more.

This subject also makes me wonder why our president has his children in a private school if he is so emphatic about our public schools being the best. Maybe it's a safety issue. I guess we are to feel comfortable that we are sending our children to unsafe schools.

There is so much hypocrisy in our government that it seems there is no end. While Obama said he wants transparency in government, he has now hired 44 czars (no congressional authorization needed)and staffs to keep congress from knowing the duplicity that the Congress to authorize. While Congress gets free transportation from the taxpayers anyway, Pelosi has just ordered 8 new Gulfstream jets to transport her buddies around. I guess global warming has been cured since they took office.

Anyway, Mr. F , I'll look into the source of my statement, but I bet I won't find it at the NEA or the ISTA.

Cow rancher,

I look forward to the free exchange of information. I also wonder why you cast the older, more experience teacher in such a bad light. I have 22 years in and am constantly evaluating myself and reinventing myself. I personally know several teachers who are experienced and do the same.

~Mr. F; aka old fart teacher

I am not casting "more experienced teachers" in a bad light. I am grateful for your service to this country, as teachers are the most under-appreciated occupation that I know.

I simply used an example from personal experience. It could also be said that you know teachers like that, but of course you chose not to.

There are some young teachers who are equally poor and should be fired as well. The great teachers should be paid the most.

The tenure system encourages laziness and does not reward increased teaching skills or passion. Competition does that. All tenure-ship does is pay you to live longer.

That's a great point. I am going to demand the oldest doctor I can find next time because, they will surely know more than any other doctor. Funny...

Garth, you're right I said that racism ended with the Emancipation Proclamation. That comment was taken out of the context that some were saying Abraham Lincoln was a liberal. It was a sarcastic comment.

That was a fun blog. Oh, the memories...

I need to get my new car worked on, does anyone know who the oldest mechanic is around here so I can have the best work done on it?

Wiglund the wise states:

"Conservative teachers do seem to create problems in the educational system."

One question, Wigster, how would you know this? You slept through most of your classes, and skipped the rest! :)

Their bosses (principals)performance reviews.

You don't know what you've said or perhaps you misunderstand what I said. I appreciate teachers and military personnel as much as anyone in America. What part of that is condescending?

You should know, as much as anyone, that the system is not working as well as it should.

If you teach high school, what was your parent attendance rate at parent/teacher conferences last year? How would you give raises to high performing teachers, if you wanted to keep them, or do you think getting 6 credit hours every five years is sufficient to prove your worthiness?

It is ridiculous what the newer generation of teachers have to go through to get paid $30,000 a year. Maybe if they can tolerate the empathetic students and parents, survive five years, NCLB, ISTEP, and take two classes, then they can bring home the bacon at $35,000. A lifetime teachers license is much more attractive for teachers.

Mr. F, I am grateful to teachers. I am not so grateful for those teachers who just try to survive through to retirement and blame others for their "flop"-methods of wasting 180 days of our future Americans time. You seem to have passion. Don't you wish you were compensated fairly for your commitment to the future of America?

Hitman648,

Why do you need to "know somebody" to get a teaching job? Isn't your resume, and interview enough to get a job.

That is another problem with libs, they think they need the village to succeed.

Be accountable for your actions and by default, you should be accountable for your inaction.

Wah...rhetoric.

If anything , the opposite is true in Greene County. Nepotism is avoided when possible, even when the person seems to be the better candidate.

I wonder if instead of:

it's not what you know but who you know,

it's more like:

it's not how well you teach but how well you know the administration

that is causing some of the problems in education today. If indeed that is the case, I can better understand why some teachers do not support giving their administrations more leeway on deciding who gets pay raises.

cow rancher- You are missing the point in regards to respect. If I said small farming was a failing institution that needs to be controlled by mega-farms(which sadly has happened), yet give a backhanded comment on my unyielding respect for your hard work...you might be offended as well.

As for merit pay, it is a slap in my face to imply I will teach better if you pay me more. Would I like better pay, sure but then comes the part about who deserves it.

Who are great teachers? Most parent requests? Highest test scores? Most Fun? The most outgoing? Even good principals would have a hard time with that. Good teaching is a frame of mind...there are some things we have little to no control over, which effect our product...does that make the teacher bad?

Who is a good farmer? Biggest yield? Biggest tractor? Best stories at the local spot? My guess is it is too complicated to even try to figure out externally.

Schools are not businesses! Public education provides for all students. Where would handicapped students go if this competition would reign over...too many of those kids would prove to be too costly.

Mr. Landry can blame the republicans all that he wants for all the problems in the world. However, coming from self-admission, is it any wonder the kid is still in school and has been for twenty years and counting? Mr. Landry points out that he doesn't want education to be on the level of Arby's or McDonald's. Ironically, it seems that his ideas comes from below even that level. Maybe it is time for you to become a productive member of society paying for your own way and not always crying over what is "owed" to you. Get a job and grow up!

Interesting assessment, but it leaves a lot of holes.

First, who is a good teacher? Maybe it is easy to pick out a really bad teacher, but what about good teachers with huge classes of struggling kids. They may look like a poorer teacher than a mediocre teacher with a smaller class full of students who excel. So who gets paid more?

Why exactly are private schools better? Take a look at their free and reduced lunch numbers and special ed numbers on the DOE website. Compare it with a Greene county school. Not to mention most parents that are willing to fork out a 5-7 thousand tuition...will probably be actively involved in their childs education.

Vouchers will not improve schools and they will not level the playing field. A ridiculous notion for people who barely see past their nose. Of course private schools would excel with vouchers. They don't have to take the struggling students from bad home situations.

So a good teacher has students who do well on the ISTEP? Have you ever looked at the new ISTEP? Still didn't answer how someone would rate a teacher. Challenging and promoting learning are pretty subjective and varies from one child to the next. Mediocre teacher? What does that look like? You do know teachers get new students every year. It is quite possible a "good" teacher gets a classroom full of struggling students and it is equally possible a teacher that is perceived as average gets a group of excellent students. I wonder how differently the teachers might be perceived after the year. My guess is the "good" teacher takes some hits, while the "average" teacher receives praise for their job.

So schools should prepare students for your life..or their own. Private schools better prepare students for life???????? Where did you get that nugget of knowledge. I just read an article refuting that notion a few weeks ago. The article basically made the case that private schools seem to excel because of the types of families and students that go their. Parental involvement is extemely high, so students tend to achieve higher. Ironically, private schools that take on considerable amounts of voucher students from poor family backgrounds take a significant dip on standardized scores, graduation rates, and college bound students.

The capitalist approach to education would encourage a survival of the fittest mentality. The worst schools would take the worst students, while the social and economic elite would dominate the "good" schools. Sounds as all-american as apple pie. Vouchers would only cover a portion of tuition.

Still no sure fire way to rate a teacher. I guess that means you don't know anymore than anyone else. Too many factors to consider. I would agree that their are some teachers that are simply poor. Most teachers do their best. Perception of whether or not they do well...may vary.

Parental involvement is crucial. I would argue a parent willing to fork over $5,000+ for tuition a year has a lot more invested in their child's education. Therefore, they would be more involved.

If a public school teacher was able to pick only the students who meet certain criteria(parental involvement, ability, attitude), this wouldn't even be a debate. Many of our area schools pass 75%+ on ISTEP, yet deal with all types of students.

As for the article, it was regarding private schools that took on public school kids. Regular classroom kids. The article was leaning toward the idea that a balance of high achievers with a lesser amount of underachievers(this didn't even talk about learning disabled)would yield favorable results. When the underachievers closed the gap...the school suffered. Basically the idea that enough bad apples spoil the bushel.

First off, Capitalism is not all about the most for your buck. It is also about making money. Schools that achieve highly will raise their price and standards. You may find a good education hard to find for what the state gives public schools now. Any other option stacks the deck against public schools.

@GCC, Capitalism is indeed about making money. But if you are offering an inferior product, you will not continue to make money. This is not the case with public education. If a school operates at a loss they just raises taxes. If we increase competition, parents will decided how much a school can charge, i.e. cheaper schools get more students. If public education is so great, it will win and then there is no reason to debate but it is not being allowed that chance. Public education dominates our current system, several times as many students are educated in public schools than in private. Vouchers give private education a chance to compete. Keeping private schools from receiving vouchers stacks the deck in public education's favor.

@Mr. F, How do we know competition will not provide teachers with a decent wage? What other nation in the history of the world came from where we were a little over 200 years ago to what we are today? That proves capitalism, and hence competition, work very well. It costs a certain amount to produce anything and so to stay in business you must, at the very least, make up your costs. To make a profit you must charge more but, as competition dictates, there is a limit on how much you can charge. Take New York, there was recent a article that explained teacher's unions fought to force private schools to pay their non-union teachers the same as union teachers in public schools. However, the private school teachers were happy with what they made. Did the student you refer to consider teaching in a private school? If she is only in it for the money, yes, that may be a wise decision but I would think that anyone with a desire to teach would be willing to stick it out, maybe get a second job until teaching earns enough money. If you have the skills and are good at your job I guarantee someone will pay you a decent wage unless you live in a place that doesn't practice capitalism.

I don't hate anybody. I'm not attacking, I'm trying to gain some insight. I thought this was a discussion. I don't agree with Mr. Landry's article and decided I'd like to start a discussion, learn something. I knew I didn't fully understand the issue of vouchers. Your and GCC's comments have helped me understand better. If you read my posts, nowhere do I call anyone names, I'm only expressing my opinions and asking for feedback. Yet I was told I can't see past the end of my nose and now you say I'm elitist and hateful, apparently because I don't agree with you. Why do we have any teachers, why are you a teacher, if it is so hard to get started? I feel its because someone cared enough about kids and the future of our nation to put in the work regardless of pay. So again, if the student was really motivated to teach, if that is her passion, money is secondary.

Vouchers and private schools are a hot topic for teachers working their tails off in public schools only to hear some politician spout off about this trend or that. They refuse to hold parents accountable because that would offend too many voters.

Like most political topics the misinformation and flat out lies spread creates distrust and polarizes the issue. I have no problem with private schools, but there are too many outside factors to ignore. You give a public school teacher a classroom full of kids with parental stability and participation...and watch what happens.

Also many private schools can't hang with some public schools like Barr-Reeve and New Harmony...why is that? The issue will not resolve itself with vouchers anymore than pouring money into schools(although fully funding all aspects including the arts should be a must). It is the attitude of the parents, teachers, schools, and communities that make great schools.

I apologize if I offended anyone, but I am more passionate than most when it comes to education.

Vouchers are ridiculous, James30096. Show me research that suggests a correlation between a student's "real life" progression and their attendance in a private school.

The very notion of taking good students out of failing schools, and I agree with Drew in that no one knows what a failing school is, and insert them into a private school is absurd. Drew's reasoning is true. They have to be admitted, and a voucher ONLY pays for the tuition. A voucher does not guarantee admission.

Public schools have professional TEACHERS. Not Chemists or Mathematicians. Actual Teachers. Teachers who can relate the content to the students so they can understand and apply it. Yes, some teachers are better than others and some slip through the cracks because of educational politics, but that does not take away from the fact that public school education is the best route for children and students.

Show me the research, James30096 that suggests otherwise.

First and foremost, your findings are futile, at best. Studies do not "show" anything. They suggest correlations between two variables. I could ask 100 Republicans in this country if they like the Democratic Party, and I would bet they would all say "no." By your standard, I could conclude that by my poll it "showed that no one likes the Democratic Party in this country." That would be wrong.

Now, The SAT's?? Really? Your basis for your argument is based on the SAT's? Wow, that is laughable. A test for which rich people can study and be readily prepared is how you want to compare education in this country? That is utterly ridiculous. Not to mention that a high SAT score means absolutely nothing in most college admissions.

Let me critique that study first. Private schools performed better. Ok, did every private school student take the test? If so, are all of the scores reported or just the high ones?

Critical thinking does not enable one to get a Bachelor's Degree. State Rep. Bruce Borders, President W. Bush, Governor Daniels all have one, and they are all morons. Morons because they cannot think critically.

I don't know how many times I can say this, but a voucher does NOT guarantee admission. All it can do is pay for the tuition.

If I polled teachers who taught students who wanted to learn, I bet they would like their jobs, not to mention their pay. Of course they want to be compared to public schools. Mainly for people like you can say they are better.

On another note, private schools do not have the kind of social interaction public schools possess. Gangs are not nearly as prevalent in private schools as they are in public schools. Matter of fact when was the last time you heard of a school shooting taking place in a private school?

Look, private schools have it easier than public schools. Students WANT to learn there, which is why public school teachers need a bigger reward for the daily problems they experience. Public school teachers are trained to give everyone a chance and include them in the lessons because they are trained professionals in the field. To divulge further, public school teachers took high risk exams and have trained experience. Most private school instructors are just that - instructors. Professionals in the field, not in the classroom.