"Army Needs Rebuilding"

[zenpundit]

The only thing I care to add to Sam's excellent - and sadly, all too accurate critique of the problems with our educational system - is that standards for prospective teachers should be markedly raised. When GPA requirements for those intended to teach 90% of the citizenry are invariably the lowest on campus of any professional school, that puts into place a negative feedback loop that guarantees the perpetuation of systemic mediocrity.

[BTW, that situ is not unintentional - plentiful, cheap and mediocre is an educational personnel policy of the states going back to at least the 1940's when they were expanding teacher's ed programs at state universities and land grant colleges from which many state universities grew. Probably good enough in 1938 when most of the population did not need to graduate High School to be gainfully employed, productive, citizens. Not so good in 2008]

[Cavguy]

The only thing I care to add to Sam's excellent - and sadly, all too accurate critique of the problems with our educational system - is that standards for prospective teachers should be markedly raised.

To attract high quality teachers, you must make the pay worthwhile. Most teachers make 30-40k a year, just above a manager at Wendy's. You can't expect world class instructors at that rate. Why would a smart college student choose a degree path where he could barely afford to raise a family on the pay?

I come from a family with a number of teachers, over the years each has left teaching for higher paying professions (all ed related), not because they hate the classroom, but because the money just wasn't worth the cost.

It's also easy to blame teachers, but numerous studies show that the home environment is the biggest predictor of academic success - all the studies showing that houses with lots of books have higher achievement, same for houses with college educated parents, etc. The moral is that families that value education will have kids who perform better. Frank fact is that many parents don't help their kid succeed at school, and blame the teacher/system.

[selil]

The moral is that families that value education will have kids who perform better. Frank fact is that many parents don't help their kid succeed at school, and blame the teacher/system.

You've identified the feedback cycle but that is changing. Uneducated people produce uneducated children, but children who are exposed to multiple positive sources at school, church, community easily overcome that. That is the purpose behind numerous inner city programs.

These are not easy issues and for every solution there are other huge problems that have to be identified. The only realistic solution is to by analogy handle the big rocks first, then the smaller ones, then the sand, and get to a better than we have currently solution.

This is a huge problem for society that directly impacts our ability to field an effective, resilient, technologically sophisticated Army.

[Ron Humphrey]

I've always found one of the best indicators as to what kind of a teacher your dealing with is the parent teacher conferences.

If what I hear is ( Ok here are the areas that (child X) is having problems with) then I start to cring.

If the conversation is more about ( Here are the areas that I need you to help your child with and heres how) Then I get that warm fuzzy they really give a darn feeling.

[Schmedlap]

How about this?

1) If you want a federally subsidized student loan, then you actually need to do something for it: military service, Americorps, Peace Corps, something similar to "work study" that actually involves actual work, etc.

2) If you want a Pell Grant or some other giveaway, see above.

Almost everyone whom I go to school with is paying their tuition by way of a federal student loan. I think there is a sound rationale that can justify the economic and social benefits of this, despite my economically conservative leanings. However, I question how many people actually need those loans because they seem to find an endless supply of funds to booze it up, eat out, buy lots of new clothes, and engage in other non-essential activity. Incredibly, they all whine that they are not eligible for LARGER loans to cover their expenses. It seems that we are funding their lifestyle, rather than their education. We've got such an entitlement mindset in this country.

[Ken White]

but I could agree with that. Not could -- Do agree. Good idea.

Where do I sign?

[slapout9]

We've got such an entitlement mindset in this country.

That is it!!! We have Rights and Entitlements in this country but not one talks about the flip side of Responsibility and Duty to earn those rights

[Steve Blair]

To attract high quality teachers, you must make the pay worthwhile. Most teachers make 30-40k a year, just above a manager at Wendy's. You can't expect world class instructors at that rate. Why would a smart college student choose a degree path where he could barely afford to raise a family on the pay?

I come from a family with a number of teachers, over the years each has left teaching for higher paying professions (all ed related), not because they hate the classroom, but because the money just wasn't worth the cost.

It's also easy to blame teachers, but numerous studies show that the home environment is the biggest predictor of academic success - all the studies showing that houses with lots of books have higher achievement, same for houses with college educated parents, etc. The moral is that families that value education will have kids who perform better. Frank fact is that many parents don't help their kid succeed at school, and blame the teacher/system.

Gotta agree with this, and also add that many of the support staff at colleges and universities (who often have a great deal to do with a student's success or lack thereof) get paid on average less than that $30-$40k. Many campuses pay carpenters more than they do department administration staff, who often end up serving as de facto academic advisors and even counselors for the students in their programs.

That pet rock aside, I have to agree 100% with the family factor. We get kids here who come out of some bad local schools, but they come from family farms and ranches and know how to work and plan. They can often overcome those early academic shortcomings because of their background and willingness to do the work needed to succeed. By the same token we see kids who don't have that sort of background coming from "top" schools and tanking out because they don't have the character to succeed without much hand-holding.

We certainly need smarter money in our education system, but we also need parents who are willing to skip that gym workout or work social function and put some time into their kids (and I don't mean scheduling yet another soccer game or some other 'forced fun' activity). Again, it's not one of those "either/or" questions. You need elements of both to succeed.

[Uboat509]

The only thing I care to add to Sam's excellent - and sadly, all too accurate critique of the problems with our educational system - is that standards for prospective teachers should be markedly raised.

If you want to do this then you need to raise teacher pay. When I was at Polk the off-post schools were having a really difficult time finding qualified teachers. Most of the those who did graduate local teaching programs then went elsewhere to teach so that they could get better pay or at least not have to stay in Leesville. That is anecdotal but I doubt that it is an isolated case. My wife looked briefly into teaching until she started making friends with some local teachers. The teaching profession as a whole seems to be caught in a downward spiral. They are overworked and underpaid which, of course, makes teaching and unattractive prospect for young college students which then makes them more shorthanded, which then makes it more difficult, which makes it less attractive to young college students and so on. My daughter's kindergarten teacher was a really good teacher but she was nearing burnout after only about five years. She had too many kids per class, she didn’t make all that much money, but the worst thing, I think, for her was the parents. You can tell when a parent takes the time work with their child at home and when they abrogate their parental responsibility to the school. I could see the frustration when I would talk to her. My son is in third grade and there are children in his class who still cannot write simple sentences. It is easy to blame the teachers for that but you have to consider that that there are WAY too many children in each class and it takes damn near an act of congress to hold a child back, and again if the parent takes the time at home to work with the child then it can alleviate the problem but too many parents would rather abrogate their parental responsibilities to the state and then complain when the state fails to do the job that they should be doing (in fairness I should note that in some households the parents are working two and three jobs to make ends meet and they barely have time to sleep, much less anything else, I understand that, I'm not talking about them. There are plenty who do not fall into that category).
I guess my point at the end of all this ranting is that the state certainly needs to do more to make teaching an attractive career choice but the parents have in equal responsibility to do their jobs as parents and not abrogate all responsibility to the state.

SFC W

[Uboat509]

Apparently I type slowly and everybody else was thinking the same thing I was and got there first.

SFC W

[selil]

Apparently I type slowly and everybody else was thinking the same thing I was and got there first.

SFC W

Looks like it!

Can we agree that this issue (education) is indicative and causal of the issues that the military is having recruiting and training the future soldiers and sailors of the nation?

[Ken White]

Selil's Post #36 above is pure gold -- I disagree with him on the desirability of National service but the rest of that comment is spot on!

Only thing I'd add is restore the ability of Teachers to discipline unruly students. Personally, I'd go for corporal punishment, many may not -- they should come up with an alternative and Cops are not a good solution.

CavGuy makes some very valid points, correctly pointing out the home environment is a part of the problem and its effect is significant. The home environment started tumbling as a result of the late 60s and the 70s educational 'reforms.' We damaged beyond repair a generation or two of parents of whom seem incapable of guiding -- and disciplining -- their children. It'll take a generation or two to repair that terrible damage.

We're paying most educators and staff about $30-50K per year as Steve also says. We're paying Major League Baseball Players a median salary of about $750 - 800K -- what's wrong with that picture?

U-Boat's comment reminds me of a Brother in Law who was a Teacher, left the field to make more money, did so but missed teaching and tried to return only to discover he couldn't get hired in any of several school districts because it was cheaper for them to hire new college grads rather than an experienced teacher with multiple advanced degrees. Weird NEA / AFT rules are the cause of that -- and those two organization were the cause of my sister in Law abandoning teaching altogether...

Lastly, Selil again:

"Can we agree that this issue (education) is indicative and causal of the issues that the military is having recruiting and training the future soldiers and sailors of the nation?"

I certainly agree that it is -- along with our foray into risk aversion as a national pastime.

[Rob Thornton]

I think Sam nailed it. I am of the opinion that when you exchange the teaching of established values, skills, and ideas for a program of social engineering you not only embark on an experiment with your future, but you erode your ability to consider causality. This is in part due to sunk costs, and in part due to pride, e.g. if you question such a momentous set of decisions, then what else did you get wrong. The relationship to national security is the issue of engineering something that is largely incongruent to you interests, and the world at large. Oddly enough, this is also one of the imperatives in a number of related areas, you should try to understand the environment and consider the range of potential outcomes before acting.

The election has provided a number of opportunities to discuss the way our system works, and the dangers from acting on emotions. What follows is non-partisan by the way. We’ve gotten into the roles and responsibilities of our branches of government, the Bill of Rights, the Constitution, and the sacrifices and stakes involved with preserving our freedoms. My 6th Grade son has not gotten any of this in school, and it concerns me greatly. The education of my own children, and the time it requires me to ensure they go forward with the tools to succeed and preserve our country for themselves and their children weigh heavily in my own choices. In that regard, it is not just a recruiting issue, but a retention one. It is not just a question of a deficit now, but of a future one. These are problems that DoD can not do much about, but are contingent upon our society to recognize. DoD leadership can and has raised the issue, both with regards to the available slice of population from which are military is drawn as a physical issue, and with regards to their education, but they are very limited in how they can affect it.

At root I think this is a cultural issue, because unless you make a convincing argument, the political default seems to be self interest. I am not referring to political as in party affiliation, but as in the interaction between people. There has in the past I’d argue been mechanisms which pulled larger segments of the U.S. population away from individual self interests and into groups which demonstrated their value based on what could be accomplished through participation and volunteering. There were good reasons for such groups, and in some cases there still are. These groups include social groups, religious groups, sporting groups, etc. The military is such a grouping, it takes an Army, a Navy, an Air Force, etc. to defend the things we value – when we stop believing that we need protecting, or start believing that we are the source of conflict, or believe that the world is none of our business, we weaken the military both in funding and in other resources because we decrease the value we place on it.

The popular reasons for investing in institutions such as these seem to me to be diminishing due to a number of reasons. Technology certainly ranks among them, who needs to go outside and play real basketball in the less than perfect weather, or risk not measuring up on the court when you can be inside on the computer and live out your fantasy basketball player? Even attributing causality to technology however is something of a misnomer. It is also about relevancy and understanding sacrifice. We have bred intolerance not only to risk, but to the idea that nothing worth our while should involve the idea of sacrifice, and that by chance that it does, that sacrifice should be the responsibility of someone else, preferably some nebulous entity to which we give some portion of our attention and income. These are entities which foster community, but ones which insulate us. The idea that such entities are necessary evils and that they require our attention to ensure they don’t become our master seems like too much work. Sometimes I wonder if we’re too domesticated, too comfortable.

I remember when I first came back from Iraq and went downtown with my kids to get an ice cream. It was far more than just the scenery which looked foreign; it was more then just transition from one environment to another; it was a bit like being in a petting zoo. It scared me more than being shot at, because the things I though I was protecting by being there were suddenly at risk at home.

Best, Rob

[zenpundit]

Cavguy wrote:

"It's also easy to blame teachers, but numerous studies show that the home environment is the biggest predictor of academic success -"
Agreed. Far and away most predictive. The number two variable according to research though is teacher quality.

I'm not blaming the teachers per se BTW - I'm speaking from inside the belly of the beast here, just as Sam is - I'm pointing to a necessary step for systemic improvement. Raising standards at Ed schools will create across the board teacher shortages and force a raising of salaries and other short term political and logistical pain for states and school districts. But gains will come with that pain.

There's no magic way to avoid biting this bullet that I can see - when pay rises to remediate a shortage, X % of ppl who would have been engineers, software programmers, lawyers and so on will enter classrooms instead. We have a lot of bored CPA's in America who passed on teaching math because that career will pay a mortgage and send kids to college.

[Ken White]

...
At root I think this is a cultural issue, because unless you make a convincing argument, the political default seems to be self interest...

Distressingly true...

The popular reasons for investing in institutions such as these seem to me to be diminishing due to a number of reasons. Technology certainly ranks among them, who needs to go outside and play real basketball in the less than perfect weather, or risk not measuring up on the court when you can be inside on the computer and live out your fantasy basketball player?

Great example; fear of failure -- or just fear of not looking cool or whatever -- seems to be terribly important to many of the teen and twenties I know.

I remember when I first came back from Iraq and went downtown with my kids to get an ice cream. It was far more than just the scenery which looked foreign; it was more then just transition from one environment to another; it was a bit like being in a petting zoo. It scared me more than being shot at, because the things I though I was protecting by being there were suddenly at risk at home.

Heh. Yep, been there, done that.

Come to think of it, don't know why I said 'Heh,' it isn't funny...

[Schmedlap]

... when we stop believing that we need protecting, or start believing that we are the source of conflict, or believe that the world is none of our business, we weaken the military both in funding and in other resources because we decrease the value we place on it.

That should be made into a billboard.