A recent post on this blog from 'everyonesfacts' stated the following (excerpted and edited only for spelling and format), in response to a previous blogpost titled "Johnny MUST go to school".

------------------begin post by 'everyonesfacts'-------------------------------- 
Public schools have over time educated more and more of our populace. The U.S. has gone from graduation rates of about less than 50% from 8th to 9th grade at the end of WWII to 70% of 12th graders today. It could do better, but the improvement is clear.

Surely the education of the black minority has improved since 1945 or 1954 and there is a new focus on why they are not doing as well as other groups - the achievement gap - the difference other than family background is that a student in an urban school doesn't have as good a teacher. The schools could do better, but the improvement is clear.

I recommend the recommendations of College Board's Teachers and the Uncertain American Future as the best remedy for public education's current state.
see link .
------------------end post by 'everyonesfacts'------------------------------------

Dear 'everyonesfacts',

It would seem that you are a teacher - and one who feels quite passionately about education. Quite possibly, you are a parent too, which can only INCREASE your commitment to education. I am a parent of two kids, so I TOO have a very direct stake in the quality of education that we have in our country.

I have also done some math & science teaching, mostly on a voluntary basis - I have a fairly lucrative non-teaching 'regular' job. Being a degreed engineer with an interest in Math, Science and Computers, I have also run MathCamps & computer classes for middle-school kids. I'm sure that I don't have your level of experience or commitment in the field of education, but I have had some exposure to the 'system'.

I have read the report (at the link that you provided) .
Note to readers: whether you agree or disagree with my point-of-view, please click on the link and read the report; it is quite an eye-opener.

While the report is well-intentioned, in my opinion, it panders to the orthodoxy of the status-quo.

There is a reason why teachers are not paid enough in the US. It is that they are treated as a commodity - a replaceable, interchangeable stream of warm bodies, paid by their yrs of service, but not by their ability. The fact that teachers are unionized only ensures the treatment of teachers as a commodity!

Yes, one easy 'fix' is a salary hike. A 20% hike across-the-board sounds fine; I would be the 1st to say that it is well-deserved. The result will be a modest increase in recruitment and a momentary increase in motivation.

But the modest improvement that it might accomplish is dwarfed by the magnitude of the current failure - the very definition of a 'band-aid' solution. It is time for us to have a strategy that converts teachers from assembly line 'commodities' to the professionals that they are. It is time to catalyze change in our schools - from altars of mediocrity to high-quality institutions that America is capable of creating. Such a change will NOT come from band-aid solutions.

We have to question the fundamental decisions that led to the existing shabbiness and grime. We have to fix the motivations and incentives that apply throughout the system.

If we can suspend our status-quo thinking for a moment, let's think about how teachers, schools and parents COULD (and SHOULD) think, instead of how they operate within the existing system.

TEACHERS [highly motivated, since it is their careers at stake; and most of them love their profession]
All educators should be asking themselves
* "Why aren't we TREATED like professionals"?
* "Why aren't we ACTING like professionals"?
* "Do unions help us"?
* "Are we doing the best that we can for our customers (parents and kids)?"

Note: since teachers ARE professionals, this type of thinking is easy for them. It wouldn't be surprising if many of them have already thought this through. Unfortunately, many who think along these lines, typically leave the profession (under the current system).

SCHOOLS [lacking the motivation, it isn't so easy to get them to think outside their existing, comfort-zone]
* "Are we SO entrenched in the status-quo that we don't want improvement?"
* "Do we exist because of the needs of our customers?"

Note: Although I seem to bash "schools", I actually respect school administrators - they too are hard-working professionals who would like to see their schools as producers of high-quality output. However, that (quality) is hard to define by the providers, unless they look OUTSIDE. For example, in the pvt sector, companies look at their customer's needs and work hard to achieve them. In our schools, the 'needs' are defined by the providers to suit their whims (or the rhetoric of political bureaucrats) - so, soft-soap goals are set e.g. diversity.

Excuse me, school administrators, but have you asked your customers (parents) what THEIR needs are? Most will tell you that they want a rigorous curriculum grounded in the basics, not the touchy-feely stuff that come from someone's political agenda!

PARENTS [highly motivated, since they are the consumers (and customers) in this scenario]
* "Are we getting a good value for our education expense?"
* "Would we accept mediocre quality in any other area (food, healthcare, utilities, products)?"

In the current system, schools are neither motivated nor free to compete for teachers.

Imagine a scenario in which teachers are sought after - like doctors, lawyers, engineers. Administrators try to recruit them to THEIR schools, in the hope of creating all-star teams that parents (customers) insist on buying from.

Sounds like a dream?

But that is exactly how the market is for engineering professionals (I can speak from experience). It's not that different for Doctors, Lawyers, Nurses, Technicians and other well-trained professionals. What is the difference between these professionals and a teacher? Not much, in terms of education and training. The ONLY difference is in the market that professionals and teachers operate.

Here are my responses to some of your specific points:

It is true that public schools have educated a vast percentage of our populace and graduation rates are at 70%. But that just means that we have pushed more kids through a faltering system. My thinking is that in a country which strives for the best, the performance results (including the achievement gap) should give us considerable pause.

Have you thought about why there should even BE an 'achievement gap' after all these decades? Your point is correct - urban schools don't have the best teachers. How do we fix that?

Could the principal of an urban school offer a higher salary to attract better teachers? No, that is not allowed. Union terms forbid such 'discrimination'. So, the rules that were ostensibly designed to protect teachers actually hurt our schools! Also the urban school principal wouldn't have enough money to recruit better teachers, under the current system anyway! One of the unintended effects of the property-tax supported school districts is to CREATE boundaries that have led to segregation.

Would a 20% across-the-board salary increase result in better teachers at urban schools? No, teachers would still prefer to avoid the 'difficult' schools.

Kids who live in urban areas don't have a choice but to go to schools within reach (exceptions being for charter schools etc). How do we fix that?

If schools had to compete for parents (customers), would that give the schools a reason to enforce higher standards? That is the premise behind "school vouchers", and that solution is a step in the right direction.

THERE IS ONLY ONE SYSTEM IN THE WORLD THAT HAS A PROVEN TRACK RECORD FOR DELIVERING "HIGH QUALITY" OUTPUT FROM A "NORMAL" WORKFORCE.

Engineers, Technicians, Doctors, Nurses - all benefit from a free-enterprise system in their respective professions. Many of them deliberately AVOID the few public-sector opportunities that exist for them, and 'take their chances' in the private sector. With K-12 education, we have deliberately created the opposite scenario - a mammoth public sector, and a stunted private sector. WHAT WERE WE THINKING? It is time to admit that we made a mistake that must be rectified.

A visitor from a foreign country would be justified in making the following observation: "Free-enterprise institutions work well in America, delivering good quality at prices that are affordable to everyone. Americans must love their food and entertainment, because they have made sure that those areas benefit from this uniquely American thing called free enterprise.

"It would also appear that the quality of education is unimportant to Americans, as long as there is access to it.  Why else would they have utilized a worn-out, broken down system to educate their kids? Americans also seem to consider teachers to be inferior professionals . Somehow, Americans think that they are not really qualified. They NEED a Union, they need to be cocooned from the marketplace."

I disagree vehemently with any notion that teachers are 'weak', either intellectually or morally. I've met many, many teachers who have the intellectual and moral strength to succeed in ANY profession. They choose to be teachers, because it is THEIR LIFE. But, any success they have comes IN SPITE of the system - not because of it. They will continue to be the best teachers in a free-enterprise system of education. In fact, they will be 'recruited' by many schools, bidding desperately to get the best staff on their teams.

The current system is designed to attract mediocre people into the teaching profession. The exceptions to that rule are a few really good, motivated, talented people who burn out after a decade and (if they're lucky) get recruited by the few private schools that manage to survive in the swamp created by Public Education.

We love to think that our system attracts thousands of Jaime Escalantes a la "Stand and Deliver". But that is not what really exists in our schools. We're all impressed by the movies that show a heart-of-gold teacher with the forbearance of Mother Theresa and/or Gandhi, the intellect of Edison or Mme Curie and the street cred and toughness of Morgan Freeman. The fact that some teachers exist who embody all those attributes is wonderful - but in a macro sense, a system that is designed to work only when run by supermen and superwomen is destined to fail.

Observe that the private sector produces SUPER quality (forced by competition) while being run by seemingly NORMAL individuals. Similarly, a private sector education system would also produce high quality output (well educated kids) while harnessing the productive abilities of teachers and administrators.

If we don't switch to free-enterprise education, we are dooming future generations of students to mediocrity. We will also lose many potentially wonderful teachers.