WARNING: This is L E N G T H Y!!
On Wed, 3 Jul 1996, Benjamin E. Wagner wrote:
> now in the U.S., teachers in private schools have lower salaries than the
> ones in public schools. Many private school teachers prefer the
> educational environment of the private school and consider that to be more
> important than a higher salary.
that's a revelation - I thought twas only those teaching in Catholic
schools who were more poorly paid. I presume the conducive environment
referred to is one in which pupils are more ready for schooling, and
therefore teachers can get on with whatever it is they perceive is their
professional role.
I'm a teacher but work at the central headquarters - it's interesting to
see the different responses to a systemic change. In this case I refer to,
it was introducing the bottom 8% into secondary school - kids who before
then went to vocational school after elementary school. These kids, being
highly distractible and potentially disruptive were dreaded. The central
body tried to allay fears by getting elementary teachers share their
experiences of managing such classes. In the elementary schools, we had
then a slight overcapacity of teachers, so such class sizes were about 30
pupils per class.
In the secondary school, there is a dire shortage so classes usually
number 40 pupils in size - so yes, just keeping an eye in the goings-on is
a toughie. Anyway, in interviewing the Principal of a Catholic girls'
school, I was taken aback that she was vehemently against having such
pupils. She perceived that the system's change was made only so we could
keep these kids off the streets for another 4 years - that is, she
perceived school's role to be that of a nursemaid!!
It is interesting and sad that 2 vehement voices against, in the run-up
to implementation came from 2 mission schools!! Traditionally, mission
schools have had better intake (by socio-economic status), but to resist
this challenge is sad. All the more so when this Principal claimed that
her nuns felt that they were called to the teaching vocation and not the
social work vocation. (this Pr is *not* a nun) I know that not all think
like this as a few of my Principal friends are nuns.
not all come prepared for school-life, and there are dire warnings that
this proportion is increasing [Read _Endangered Minds_ by Jane M Healy]
Problem is one of definition : is teaching the transmission of knowledge
or creating an environment conducive to Learning/the practice of good
habits of mind (Marzano)?
We would like if everyone came into the teaching profession for
altruistic reasons. Nevertheless, most people are *not* born or bred as
masochists. I've had senior high equiv. students tell me I was stupid to
become a teacher when I might earn more "outside". Money is not the
be-all-and-end-all, but if it is a reflection of how well one is doing,
and there are no other kinds of positive strokes forthcoming, then pay
becomes an important indicator of one's social standing/worth.
> If the U.S. were to have an entirely private school system, I believe it
> would soon become a class system. The elite schools would be populated with
> wealthy students and high-paid teachers and the rest would have low-paid
> teachers and probably receive a lesser education.
but then if your belief in altruistic forces is true, then there would be
some Called to work amongst the average and below (financially).
I wonder too what you mean by a better or a lesser education - is this in
terms of quantifiables, like quality of grades, breadth of content
coverage or range of activities... at the end of the day, it boils down to
the ethos of the school and that, to a large extent is determined by the
school administration and the leadership, and how that leadership engages
the staff in a common mission.
Be that as it may, public perception *will* tend to label schools elite
and non-elite, largely by function of socio-economic intake. Those from
wealthier homes can afford more resources - so might not be the schools
doing the work. Teachers who get to teach the less advantaged, often *do*
feel that their pupil management skills are not appreciated, and that
so-called "good" teachers in good schools would not manage as well as they
in the same circumstances. The problem is that our(my system's) present
quantifiable measures of success (academic performance) are not adequate
proxies for the measurement of such skills. in fact, the concept of
measurement is reductionist and simplistic, so any measure will be found
wanting. The question is how the ground might be softened so that schools
develop their own standards and measures, with the accompanying caveats.
In a centralised system, the dependence mindset is difficult to break out
of - with rights come responsibilities and the latter is sometimes too too
daunting.
> academic knowledge, also must pass on the values of the society. In the
> U.S. with its traditional emphasis on the rugged individual, people are
> reluctant to pay more taxes to finance education when there is so much
> disagreement over values.
is it about values or about getting certification and a job after school,
or both..? I assume the "rugged" individual refers to the WildWest
frontier hero image yes? I'm not American so don't know.
is the reluctance to finance education because of the values
disagreement or because those without children feel they won't benefit and
therefore...? I'm not sure what Values is referred to - If Education is a
Good and of value, then why withhold? but then again, I believe in
payback.
> In Japan, a much more homogeneous society, teachers are highly respected
> and well-paid. There is little disagreement over the values of its
> society. The importance of education is universally accepted.
imho, I believe it's something to do with the Imperial examination system
which was imported to Japan from China. from our perspective, the
Japanese system is interesting 'cause it appears as if the kids go to
school to be socially acculturated, and then to jukus for the subject
content.
Interesting TitBit: In Taiwan, teachers are EXEMPT from paying income tax!!
yes! no lie! *exempt from income tax!! and the respect for
teachers is still strong - my aromatherapist gave several talks there and
still is addressed as Teacher. Wow! *my* Anglicised ex-students figure
I'm not much older than they and call me by name!!
> imperative to raise teachers salaries so that education can draw from a
> large pool of applicants. I would not draw the conclusion that because of
> our parsimony, education attracts the less intelligent and not as
> competent.
This is a start, since Status is sometimes imputed from salary. but the
activities that go on in schools also need consideration. If the home can
become as resource-rich (or more) than the school, and kids can indeed
learn on their own, then what is schooling for? (read: Perelmann's
_School's Out_)
In our case, because we are multiracial in composition, racial,
religious and social understanding and tolerance are important objectives
- for us, cohesion is a very important value. Too bad it isn't easily
quantifiable!! ;)
Beatrice Tay
(too foolhardy to shut up)
--Beatrice Tay <bea@moe.edu.sg>
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>