K-12 Education in South Carolina

[Captain Worley]

Breed, congrats to your wife. My wife teaches and she's told me about all the work needed.

However, I disagree with you. I know lots of people who KNEW that TERI would run out in five years and it still came as a shock when they didn't get extended. Also, I believe your wife is an exception at realizing that it will end after ten years. Most of the certified (I think all, but I hesitate with absolutes) teachers at her school have said, and believe, it will be extended.

In the end, I guess we'll see what happens a few years down the road.

I think y'all are very wise to use the money the way you have. And yes, I too thought it would get shot down in the budget process.

[Spartan]

If SC is serious about improving education, that pay increase will be maintained if not increased for inflation at the very least. If we can't maintain a competitive salary advantage over our neighboring states we will continue to loose good teachers to them.

[Captain Worley]

Spartan, I think a lot more get fed up and quit teaching altogether than go to other states. Honestly, I'm hoping my wife does get fed up with it. The amount of time and effort she puts into isn't worth the money and wear and tear on her. Sure, more pay would be nice, but the amount of bureaucratic BS she has to generate for 'accountability' is staggering. It just isn't worth it. It also lessens her ability to teach to her fullest potential

Breed, no lie, I truly hope your wife is in a better situation. But with the move to inclusion, I think the regular ed teachers are going to be expected to take on more special ed duties (and paperwork).

[Spartan]

Well, I was thinking about new teachers right out of school more so than others. But the bureaucratic BS notwithstanding, don't you think a salary increase would attract more teachers? I think that every state has its bureaucratic BS to work through, the difference is that they are better compensated for what they do.

Of course, thats all well and good to talk about, but trying to increase government funding for anything in SC is like pulling teeth.

[Captain Worley]

I think the money would attract more first year teachers, but I think they would retain even less of them, percentagewise. Even if you love the kids, as my wife does, there is only so much you are willing to sacrifice for the job and the generally ungrateful people. The education system needs to be scrapped and completely overhauled.

I know plenty of people who quit after their first year, and never went back to teaching. I wouldn't go back to it if I had to teach under the public schools. I was very lucky that when I taught AP seniors, I was doing it through a Tech school. I would never, ever do it if I had to go through the stuff the people working for the district had to do.

[Spartan]

The problem that you are describing then, is societal, more than it is institutional. I'm not sure that there is anything the government can do about that.

[Captain Worley]

Yep, you are right. Pay increases would be nice, but they really won't solve anything. The real problems are poor parenting and poor administration (adminstrators=politicians for the most part). Unless we as a society demand change, it isn't going to get any better.

Would you believe in this age, there are kids coming to school (1st grade) who don't even know their colors, let alone how to read or write? And not just a few. To me, that's criminal neglect.

[breed]

Spartan, I think a lot more get fed up and quit teaching altogether than go to other states. Honestly, I'm hoping my wife does get fed up with it. The amount of time and effort she puts into isn't worth the money and wear and tear on her. Sure, more pay would be nice, but the amount of bureaucratic BS she has to generate for 'accountability' is staggering. It just isn't worth it. It also lessens her ability to teach to her fullest potential

Breed, no lie, I truly hope your wife is in a better situation. But with the move to inclusion, I think the regular ed teachers are going to be expected to take on more special ed duties (and paperwork).

Well, I was thinking about new teachers right out of school more so than others. But the bureaucratic BS notwithstanding, don't you think a salary increase would attract more teachers? I think that every state has its bureaucratic BS to work through, the difference is that they are better compensated for what they do.

Of course, thats all well and good to talk about, but trying to increase government funding for anything in SC is like pulling teeth.

My wife has taught in NC and SC... the difference in the amount of administrative BS that she has to go through is astounding. The fact that my wife teaches at a poorer school complicates things as she has to do an administrative tap dance that better-off schools don't have to deal with. In North Carolina, my wife had a full-time assistant to help with her class. My wife didn't have to eat lunch in the cafeteria with her kids. My wife got several opportunities each day to do planning (music class, PE, art, etc.). My wife didn't have lose a couple hours a week to tend bus lines. On average, my wife works over 12 hours per day during the school year, with no breaks. If you do the math, that comes out to about 50 hours per week if it was spread throughout the year.

My daughter's school (which is in a better-off area) is rife with parental involvement and parental volunteers. They actually turn away volunteers. At my wife's school, a local church sent volunteers, but that ended pretty quickly. There's always talk about low teacher to student ratios. But the career-low class size that my wife currently has is meaningless if you lose half your day to administrative crap.

What it results in is that the schools that need the most help have three kinds of teachers...

1. Early career teachers who are just trying to get into the profession... after a few years they move to a school where conditions are better (if they don't get burnt out by then)

2. Crappy teachers who fit the model of the sterotypical public sector employee (poorly motivated, rarely innovative, and knows there will be no reprecussions for either)

3. Teachers who still glom onto idealistic intentions of making a difference, inspite of colleagues who get out (group #1) and the colleagues whose lack of work ethic plays an even greater burden on them (group #3)

One thing that there is no shortage of is money. My wife's school has more than enough money. That, I think, surprises people. The money just needs to be directed better. If making a difference in poorer schools is really the goal, maybe rather than spending over $10k per classroom for Promethean Boards, that money could have better routed to help educate the parents of these children (which is one of the root problems), or to bring in more administrative staff to eliminate the need for teachers and their $40k salaries doing work that can and should be done by people making $25k salaries.

While I scoff at the notion of completely overhauling the education system, something needs to be done. Whatever happens, you need innovative people in the school system from top-to-bottom... from the political leadership right down to the part-time janitor. Find people that take pride in their work, pay them enough to prevent them from leaving, and empower them to make an impact. If you do that, the rest will take care of itself.

[Spartan]

While I scoff at the notion of completely overhauling the education system, something needs to be done. Whatever happens, you need innovative people in the school system from top-to-bottom... from the political leadership right down to the part-time janitor. Find people that take pride in their work, pay them enough to prevent them from leaving, and empower them to make an impact. If you do that, the rest will take care of itself.

Well it sounds like thats what needs to be done. Clearly something isn't working right. Perhaps a complete overhaul isn't necessary- but an evaluation of the process that is imposed on the districts by the state. I'm sure that some things work fine, but clearly there are things that don't. Thats what needs to be identified and fixed.

But I see now that we have two angles from which we are discussing this. Your point of view is based on a teacher who has clearly had some experience, regardless of how long it is. On the other hand, my previous comments about salary were based on several friends' comments who are new teachers. They are in SC because they want to be, but they are each, fortunately, married and thus have other income to support themselves. I don't think any new teacher who isn't married or living at home could survive. They also said that many of their classmates went on to other states- North Carolina in particular- because of better salaries. They talk about the paperwork and other such things all the time to though...

So it seems that money, in some respects is still the problem, but as you said, its how the money is directed. Clearly we both agree that there are problems with the system in attracting new teachers based partially on salary, but then once they get past that- they see the "other side" related to the administrative BS they have to put up with.

Meanwhile, this is what the Department of Education is working on. Thats part of the "Task Force on Funding for World Class Learning."

There is also the Task Force on Resources for a Competitive South Carolina

[Captain Worley]

I've heard it explained this way:

There are basically four players in a child's education: Administration, teacher, parents, child.

We all know, even the politicians, that SOMETHING has to be done. Here's how the politicians attack the problem:

Administrator-No changes because they are politicians. Admitting there is a problem with them is admitting there is a problem with us.

Parents-No changes because they can vote. Can't tell them they're a large part of the problem because they'll vote us out.

Children-Man, if we say the children are unprepared due to the parents poor skills, the parents will get mad and vote us out.

Teachers-Hey! They aren't a big voting block compared to the parents. We've found the problem! Bad teachers! They need to take more classes on how to be effective and attend training classes! Then they can do paperwork that shows they are accountable for how the child did! Brilliant!

If you were a teacher, how would this make you feel?

[breed]

Most of the certified (I think all, but I hesitate with absolutes) teachers at her school have said, and believe, it will be extended.

Just a correction... I spoke to my wife (that happens on occassion, much to her dismay) and she mentioned that the incentive can be extended for another ten years by going through a similar, but not quite as stringent, process as the original application and testing process.

That does change things a little bit... if funding remains available, which isn't a given... then the additional $7,500 per year could be extended. Although the $2,500 per year additional incentive that used to be offered for certified teachers who teach in poorer schools was axed.

[Captain Worley]

Oh, OK. That explains it. Thanks for pointing that out.

[CorgiMatt]

"Quality Counts," the most trusted annual national report on public education, has ranked South Carolina #1 in teacher development.

http://www.wltx.com/news/story.aspx?storyid=57179

[goodbye]

Newsweek has published its latest list of the 1300 Top Public High Schools in America. Nineteen schools in South Carolina made the list. Only one school in the state earned a spot in the top ten nationally. Academic Magnet in North Charleston came in at #7. The School District of Greenville County has the most schools represented in the state with a total of nine making the list.

More information from Newsweek

[sonofaque86]

A.C. Flora High School in Columbia is in the top 5 percent ranked schools in the country. There are 21 other SC schools on the list but arent shown on this link

http://www.thestate.com/breaking/story/436232.html

[CorgiMatt]

A.C. Flora was left off the list when it first published.

[Spartan]

I hate it when billboards actually work on me, but thats where I found this website. I hope everyone in SC will support this petition to change the SC Constitution's provision for a "minimally adequate" education. Their goal is to get this on the ballot in 2010.

They propose the following change:

"It is proposed that Section 3, Article XI of the Constitution of this State be amended to read:

[Captain Worley]

Hmmm...I could see how that could be lawyered into causing all sorts of legal problems. Nice thought, though. I'm working on a better wording.

[monsoon]

^The problem that I have with these kinds of schemes is they never address the problem(s) that are supposed to be fixing. So now you will have a bunch of political people going through all the effort to change the Constitution, but I don't see where there is any description on what real changes this will bring or require. It looks good, I guess, on a campaign button.

[Spartan]

Obviously changing those words won't technically improve the situation. Changing the state's policy on education is a cost free way to show that SC is committed to improving its educational standards. It then provides the grounds for legislators to advocate for increased funding where its needed.

[Spartan]

I would file this under "the bad"... Link

York County is building a 128 acre high school in York, and although it will be an attractive high school, it will only look good from a distance- I assume as much as a half mile off of the street. The contractor says this is at the scale of some university projects that they have done, and that they are treating it as 3 separate projects.

[monsoon]

.... Changing the state's policy on education is a cost free way to show that SC is committed to improving its educational standards. It then provides the grounds for legislators to advocate for increased funding where its needed.

Yet it does not change state policy. One could easily argue that a minimally adequate education is an education that is also one that is high quality and which "allows" a student to reach his highest potential. I think at best it distracts the public that nothing is really being done about it.

[Captain Worley]

I agree with monsoon on this issue. Politicians just trying to make it look like they've done something, when all they did was change a few words and possibly open a legal can of worms.

A large part of society doesn't value education anymore. That's the root of the problem, and that's what needs to be addressed. I don't think it can be accomplished through political means. Society as a whole has to embrace the concept of education, including vo-tech.

[GvilleSC]

A large part of society doesn't value education anymore. That's the root of the problem, and that's what needs to be addressed. I don't think it can be accomplished through political means. Society as a whole has to embrace the concept of education, including vo-tech.

Which "large part of society" are you saying doesn't value education, but did at one point in time?

[Spartan]

Yet it does not change state policy. One could easily argue that a minimally adequate education is an education that is also one that is high quality and which "allows" a student to reach his highest potential. I think at best it distracts the public that nothing is really being done about it.

So what should be done about it?