A writer must “know and have an ever-present consciousness that this world is a world of fools and rogues… tormented with envy, consumed with vanity; selfish, false, cruel, cursed with illusions… He should free himself of all doctrines, theories, etiquettes, politics…” —Ambrose Bierce (1842-1914?). “The nobility of the writer's occupation lies in resisting oppression, thus in accepting isolation” —Albert Camus (1913-1960). “What are you gonna do” —Bertha Brown (1895-1987).
Labels
- drumpf
- pensions
- IL politics
- COVID-19
- brown favorites
- Mammon
- Retrumplicons
- elections
- teachers' letters
- Contrarian
- social justice
- Ukraine
- HCR
- eco/genocide
- sundry
- Joyce Vance
- Hartmann
- healthcare
- American Racism
- TRS
- pension analyses
- Scotus
- Domestic Terrorists
- Iran
- self-defense
- Alzheimer's
- college adjuncts
- ed reform
- unions
- God
- Schooldemic
- CounterPunch
- poets
- speeches
- songs
- fair solutions
- Common Dreams
- books
- fair taxation
- Israeli Palestinian War
- poisoning children
- January 6th
- ProPublica
- miss you
- Hedges
- animal injustice/justice
- higher ed
- humor
- COLA
- ICE
- Giroux
- scams
- mcconnell
- Injustice
- Buyer Beware
- blogging
- CPS/CTU
- Guardian
- NY Times
- Pharma Greed
- baseball
- GB Photographs
- Truthdig
- charter schools
- GPO/WEP
- Lists
- masks
- space
- Censorship
- curricula
- grandsons
- DB v. DC
- AI
- poetry
- Dylan
- Indivisible
- Camus
- USPS
- WWII
- Beatles
- Venezuela
- MP
- Roe v. Wade
- CBF v. BK
- cats
- sculpture
- Priest Abuse
- United Nations
- Zimet
- Boycott
- Christmas
- Poems
- granddaughter
- Kamala
- Social Security
- F&L
- Freedom Academy
- zorn v. brown
- Lightfoot
Monday, May 4, 2026
It's that time of the year again: A Selection of Final Exams for Your Perusal
Thursday, January 4, 2024
Librarians, Who Lost Jobs for Not Banning Books, Are Fighting Back
Brooky Parks filed state and federal discrimination complaints alleging she was fired by the High Plains Library District after objecting to the cancellation of programs she had planned for youth of color and LGBTQ teens.(Photo by Hyoung Chang/The Denver Post)
The American Library Association says
challenges to books on their shelves are up sharply in recent years. In the
cultural battle over what information should be publicly available, some
librarians are losing their jobs. One fought back. Colorado Public Radio's Matt
Bloom has her story.
MATT BLOOM: Brooky Parks started
working in the teen section of a local public library in Erie, Colo., in 2019.
The 49-year-old mom of two got to talk to kids every day and help them discover
new books.
BROOKY PARKS: I loved it. It was
probably my dream job.
BLOOM: As a part of her work, she
launched an anti-racism workshop and what she called the Read Woke book club,
focused on LGBTQ-themed books. Soon, the library district got complaints from
two local parents about their titles, and managers cancelled her workshop and
club. Parks was shocked.
PARKS: And I said, well, I don't
understand why we're going to rename an entire book club just because two
members of our entire community don't like the word woke. That's the very
definition of censorship.
BLOOM: The library board also passed a
new policy that discouraged, quote, "controversial events." Parks
pushed back in public meetings, actions she said led to the district firing her
after more than two years on the job.
PARKS: And they said, we just feel
like you're not taking responsibility for any of this, and so your services are
no longer needed.
BLOOM: The next month, she filed a
discrimination complaint with the Federal Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission and Colorado State Civil Rights Commission, and she filed a lawsuit.
But she hoped to prove her firing was discriminatory before taking her case to
court. Her employer, the High Plains Library District, said they canceled
Parks' programs to rework their titles because they promoted an agenda. Here's
District Director Matthew Hortt at a board meeting in December.
MATTHEW HORTT: We're not restricting,
we're not censoring information. What we're doing is we're trying to present it
in a way we can have a discussion.
BLOOM: But after a year of
investigating her case, Colorado's Civil Rights Commission ruled Parks' firing
was illegal discrimination. And this fall, the library district settled Parks'
lawsuit against them before it went to court for $250,000. Iris Halpern is her
lawyer.
IRIS HALPERN: It sends a message out
that there are consequences - financial consequences - and we can put
guardrails up against things like censorship and discrimination.
BLOOM: Halpern is also representing
librarians from Texas and Wyoming in similar cases.
HALPERN: What we're seeing is these
terminations are backfiring within the communities where they happen.
BLOOM: The American Library
Association recorded more than 700 attempts to ban books or censor library
programming around racial or LGBTQ issues, the most on record. President Emily
Drabinski says Parks' settlement victory is likely the first of many legal
challenges.
EMILY DRABINSKI: This is a big win and
it's an exciting one, and it buoys the rest of us in the field, I think, to
learn about her fight and her win.
BLOOM: For Parks, the victory came at
a cost. She was unemployed for eight months and had to get help from an online
fundraiser to pay her bills.
PARKS: And without that, I probably
would have lost my house.
BLOOM: She's now working again, this
time at an academic library at the University of Denver.
PARKS: I know I sacrificed my dream
job, but I can lay down and sleep at night knowing that I did the right thing.
BLOOM: As a part of her legal
settlement, a lot changed at her former library. Librarians now get a chance to
veto program cancellations, and a new policy states inclusive and diverse
programming is encouraged.
Source URL: https://portside.org/2024-01-03/librarians-who-lost-jobs-not-banning-books-are-fighting-back
Tuesday, October 10, 2023
"The U.S. is losing teachers at an alarming rate" -Steven Singer
Teach for America (TFA) was
a solution to a problem it helped create. Educators have been leaving the
profession for decades due to poor salary, poor working conditions, heavy
expectations and lack of tools or respect.
So Wendy Kopp, when in Princeton, created a program to fast track non-education majors into the classroom where they would teach for a few years and then enter the private sector as “experts” to drive public policy. These college graduates would take a five week crash course in education and commit to at least two years in the classroom thereby filling any vacant teaching positions.
Surprise! It didn’t
work. In fact, it made things worse. Apparently
de-professionalizing education isn’t an incentive to dive into the field.
That
isn’t to say everyone who went through the program became a bad teacher. But
the few good and committed educators that did come through the program could
have done so even more successfully by graduating with a degree in education.
Now
the organization created in 1990 is expecting
its lowest enrollment in 15 years.
TFA anticipates placing slightly less than 2,000 teachers in schools across the
country this fall. That’s two-thirds of the number of first-year teachers TFA
placed in schools in fall 2019, and just one-third of the number it sent into
the field at its height in 2013.
Apparently
fewer people than ever don’t want to train for four to five years to become
lifelong teachers – and neither do they want to be lightly trained for a few
years as TFA recruits, either – even if that means they can pass themselves off
as education experts afterwards and get high paying policy positions at think
tanks and government.
On the one
hand, this is good news. Watering down what
it means to be a teacher is even less popular than actually being an educator. On
the other hand, we have a major crisis that few people are prepared to handle.
The
US is losing teachers at an alarming rate.
After decades of neglect only
made worse by the Covid-19 pandemic, we’re
missing almost a million teachers.
Nationwide, we only have about 3.2 million teachers left!
According to the Bureau of Labor
Statistics, there are 567,000 fewer educators in our public
schools today than
there were before the pandemic. And that’s on top of already losing 250,000
school employees during the recession of 2008-09 most of whom were never
replaced. All while enrollment increased by 800,000 students.
Meanwhile, finding replacements has been difficult. Across the country, an average of one educator is hired for every two jobs available. Not only are teachers paid 20% less than other college-educated workers with similar experience, but a 2020 survey found that 67% of teachers have or had a second job to make ends meet.
It’s
no wonder then that few college students want to enter the profession. Over the
past decade, there’s been a major decline in
enrollment in bachelor’s degree programs in education.
Beginning in 2011, enrollment in
such programs and new education certifications in
Pennsylvania — my home state— started to decline. Today, only about a third as many students are enrolled
in teacher prep programs in the Commonwealth as there were 10 years ago. And
state records show new certifications are down by two-thirds over that period.
To
put that more concretely, a decade ago roughly 20,000 new teachers entered the
workforce each year in the Commonwealth, while last year only 6,000 did so, according to
the state Department of Education (PDE).
But don’t look to most of the so-called experts to solve the problem. A great deal of them are former TFA recruits! Through programs like TFA’s Capitol Hill Fellows Program, alumni are placed in full-time, paid staff positions with legislators so they can “gain insights into the legislative process by working in a Congressional office” and work “on projects that impact education and opportunities for youth.”
Why do so many lawmakers hire them? Because they don’t cost anything.
Their salaries are
paid in full by TFA through a fund
established by Arthur Rock, a California tech billionaire who hands the
organization bags of cash to pay these educational aides’ salaries. From 2006 to
2008, alone, Rock – who also sits on TFA’s board – contributed $16.5 million
for this purpose.
This isn’t about helping lawmakers understand the issues. It’s about
framing the issues to meet the policy initiatives of the elite and wealthy
donors. It’s about selling school privatization, high stakes testing and ed-tech
solutions.
As
US Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-New York) said on a call with Justice
Democrats: “I don’t think people who are taking money from
pharmaceutical companies should be drafting health care legislation. I don’t
think people who are taking money from oil and gas companies should be drafting
our climate legislation.”
I’d like to add the following: people taking money from the testing and school
privatization industry shouldn’t be drafting education policy. People who
worked as temps in order to give themselves a veneer of credibility should not
be treated the same as bona fide experts who dedicate their lives to kids in
the classroom.
The
whole point of this scam is to serve the needs of the privatization movement.
Investors
want to change public education into a cash cow. They want to alter the rules
so that corporations running districts as charter or voucher schools can cut
services for children and use the extra cash for profits.
And
that starts with teachers.
If
we allow privatizers to replace well-prepared and trained teachers with lightly
trained temps, we can reduce the salaries we pay instructors. We delegitimize
the profession. We redefine the job “teacher.” It’s no longer a highly-trained
professional. It’s something anyone can do from off the street – thus we can
pay poverty wages.
And
the savings from cutting salaries can all go into our corporate pockets!
This
kind of flim-flam would never be allowed with our present crop of highly
trained professionals because many of them belong to labor unions. We have to
give them the boot so we can exterminate their unions and thus provide easy
pickings for the profiteers.
This
helps explain why so many
plans to address the teacher exodus are focused almost exclusively on
recruiting new hires while
completely ignoring the much larger numbers of experienced teachers looking for
the exits.
According to
the National Education Association (NEA),
it is teachers who are quitting that is driving a significant part of the
current educator shortage. More teachers quit the job than those who retire,
are laid off, are transferred to other locations, go on disability or die. And
this has remained true almost every year for the last decade with few
exceptions.
To
put it another way, you can’t stop a ship from sinking if you don’t plug up the
leak first!
But
experienced teachers always have been the biggest obstacle to privatizing
public schools and expanding
standardized testing. That’s why
replacing them with new educators has been one of the highest priorities of corporate
education reform.
After
all, it’s much harder to try to indoctrinate seasoned educators with propaganda
that goes against everything
they learned to be true about their
students and profession in a lifetime of classroom practice than to encourage
those with no practical experience to just drink the Kool-Aid.
So
it should come as no surprise that supply side policymakers are using the current
teacher exodus as an excuse to remake the profession in their
own image.
As Rahm Emanuel,
Chief of Staff to President Barack Obama (Later Chicago Mayor) said: “You never
let a serious crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that [is] it’s an
opportunity to do things you think you could not do before.”
If
our policymakers really want to solve the problem, we’d spend at least as much
time keeping the experienced teachers we have as trying to get new ones to join
their ranks. Research shows that teacher
experience matters.
“The
common refrain that teaching experience does not matter after the first few
years in the classroom is no longer supported by the preponderance of the
research,” Tara Kini and Anne Podolsky write in Does Teaching
Experience Increase Teacher Effectiveness?
“We
find that teaching experience is, on average, positively associated with
student achievement gains throughout a teacher’s career.”
Their
analysis is based on 30 studies
published over the past 15 years and concludes:
1)
Experienced teachers on average are more effective in raising student
achievement (both test scores and classroom grades) than less experienced ones.
2)
Teachers do better as they gain experience. Researchers have long documented
that teachers improve dramatically during their first few years on the job.
However, teachers make even further gains in subsequent years.
3)
Experienced teachers also reduce student absences, encourage students to read
for recreational purposes outside of the classroom, serve as mentors for young
teachers and help to create and maintain a strong school community.
The road to
keeping experienced teachers isn’t exactly mysterious.
First,
there must be an increase in
salary. Teacher pay must at least be adequate including
the expectation that as educators gain experience, their salaries will rise in
line with what college graduates earn in comparable professions. This is
not happening now.
In
addition, something must be done to improve
teachers working conditions.
Lack of proper support and supportive administrators is one of the main reasons
experienced teachers leave a building or the profession.
And
perhaps most obviously, politicians have to stop scapegoating educators for all
of society’s problems and even for all of the problems of the school system.
Teachers don’t get to make policy. They are rarely even allowed a voice, but
they are blamed for everything that happens in and around education.
If
we want teachers to work with socially disadvantaged students, they must be
provided with the institutional supports needed to be effective and steadily
advance their skills. But this requires making education a priority and
not a political football.
To do that, you would need to stop bankrolling organizations like TFA. However, the billionaires funding school privatization and the standardized testing industry would never allow it. So unlike our public schools, as fewer and fewer applicants come to TFA, there will always be money to keep it afloat. Those who are causing the teacher exodus will never be the ones to fix it.
-Steven
Singer
Wednesday, March 15, 2023
"It is not students and teachers who are failing the test of this pandemic, but a political and economic system that puts profit over people"
This school year, as teachers carefully construct unit
plans, build community with students, and navigate ongoing staff shortages,
they also have to contend with a barrage of media coverage catastrophizing
about so-called “learning loss.”
Headlines suggest the losses are “historic,” “devastating,” and that students are “critically behind.” This fearmongering comes not only from the political right; there is a dangerous liberal-conservative consensus.
President Biden’s Secretary of Education, Miguel Cardona, said: “I want to be very clear: The results in today’s Nation’s Report Card [delivered by the National Assessment of Educational Progress] are appalling and unacceptable.”
The learning loss narrative shrouds itself in moment-in-time data from standardized tests, but it is not really about this moment. Rather, it is a weapon wielded against the past, to shift blame for pandemic school closures, and against the future, to narrowly frame the policy choices ahead.
The last few years have negatively impacted — sometimes terribly — young people’s lives. In what is likely an undercount, more than a million people in the United States have died of COVID-19. And the pandemic is not over; people in our students’ families continue to become debilitated or die.
Each lost life is a thread in the tapestry of relationships that knit together families, communities, neighborhoods, and schools. The very groups that make up the bulk of public-school families — people of color and poor folks — also disproportionately bear the burden of the pandemic, suffering the highest rates of infection, severe illness, hospitalization, and death.
Was the shuttering of schools and move to remote learning necessary? Yes. Did it exacerbate the emergency for families and young people? Of course. Schools matter. Schools are hubs of community and care, and without them we are all worse off.
In a country that offers no public childcare to families, schools make it possible for parents and caregivers to work. In a country in which roughly 10 percent of the population struggles with hunger — again, disproportionately represented in public schools —schools make it possible for children to eat.
And yes, schools are places where children learn: to read, multiply, and sing; to be a good friend and community member; to ask questions and seek answers — how photosynthesis works, what activists mean when they call themselves “water protectors,” and so much more.
Given the importance of schools, and the magnitude of the pandemic’s devastation, what is puzzling is not that students’ academic skills were impacted, but that anyone would imagine otherwise. We are almost three years into an ongoing health crisis that has shaved years off the average life expectancy in the United States. Of course it has left marks on us.
But the learning loss narrative does not invite reflection on the whole range of collective losses we’ve suffered, nor does it encourage asking why our government — and our political and economic system — failed so spectacularly in anticipating, planning for, and coping with the coronavirus.
Shifting blame away from the for-profit healthcare system and the government’s response to the coronavirus is part of what makes the learning loss narrative so valuable to politicians who have no interest in challenging existing patterns of wealth and power. It is a narrative meant to distract the public and discipline teachers.
Here’s the recipe: 1. Establish that closing schools hurt students using a narrow measure like test scores; 2. Blame closure of schools on teacher unions rather than a deadly pandemic; 3. Demand schools and teachers help students “regain academic ground lost during the pandemic” — and fast; 4. Use post-return-to-normal test scores to argue that teachers and schools are “failing”; 5. Implement “teacher-proof” (top-down, standardized, even scripted) curriculum or, more insidiously, argue for policies that will mean an end to public schools altogether.
The path ahead looks eerily like what Naomi Klein has called the “shock doctrine,” where powerful actors, like politicians, corporate tycoons, and pundits, use people’s disorientation following a collective shock — whether a devastating earthquake or a deadly pandemic — to push pro-business, neoliberal policies.
The Washington Post quoted a statement from former Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos that the pandemic test scores proved children were “hostages” in a “one-size-fits-none system that isn’t meeting their needs.” Her solution, of course, is what she has long pushed: more “school choice” and privatization.
The Biden administration has offered some respite from billionaire free market fanatics like DeVos, but its policies are woefully inadequate. (See “Activists Mobilize for Waivers and Opt Outs as Biden Mandates Tests” in the Spring 2021 issue.)
The latest iteration of the Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund allocated a relatively generous $122 billion to “help safely reopen and sustain the safe operation of schools and address the impact of the coronavirus pandemic on the nation’s students.”
But the law prioritizes speed — schools must spend all of the money by 2024 or forfeit it — over investments in teachers, counselors, school librarians, and nurses. Many school districts cannot quickly fill positions or, knowing that the federal windfall is only short-term, choose not to.
According to Marianna McMurdock, a staff reporter at The 74, a recent survey of 291 district leaders found that districts are expanding hiring of substitutes, paraprofessionals, and tutors while shying away from hiring full-time teachers and lowering class sizes — reforms that would have more impact on student learning and better inoculate schools from the overcrowded classrooms that made shuttering schools necessary.
We know what comes next — a round of dismal math and reading scores and the right’s favorite chestnut: “See? Just throwing money at schools doesn’t work.” Schools are racing to spend short-term government funds before they run out.
But the point is that adequate funding for schools should never run out. Tripling Title I funding, a Biden campaign promise popularized by Bernie Sanders, would only cost one-fiftieth of the $1.5 trillion in wealth U.S. billionaires have added to their fortunes during the pandemic. Truly confronting the many losses students in the United States have shouldered requires connecting the dots to the gains of the wealthy.
The learning loss drumbeat reveals the mainstream media to have more contempt than curiosity about what might actually improve schools’ long-term health. Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor, writing in The New Yorker, is an exception. Noting the recent teacher strikes in Columbus and Seattle, Taylor wrote:
“A real plan for recovery from the devastation of the pandemic in public education can be found in the strikes initiated by teachers and their unions. Their demands — for smaller class sizes, better conditions within school buildings, more resources to attend to students’ mental health, and higher pay for teachers and teacher assistants — have created a map for how to boost learning achievement.”
This pandemic has brought real losses, and like our friends in Seattle and Columbus, we know what schools need to help students heal from the traumas of the last several years: more teachers, counselors, and nurses; smaller class sizes; planning time for educators to develop curriculum and pedagogical strategies centering students’ lives and realities; beautiful spaces to learn, make art, garden, and play.
Let’s not fall for the learning loss trick that shifts blame from the catastrophic results of decades of disinvestment in public goods to the victims of that catastrophe and those organizing to recover from it. It is not students and teachers who are failing the test of this pandemic, but a political and economic system that puts profit over people.
-The "Learning Loss" Trap by the editors of Rethinking Schools:
https://rethinkingschools.org/articles/the-learning-loss-trap/
Thursday, December 15, 2022
There’s a Reason There Aren’t Enough Teachers in America. Many Reasons, Actually (by Thomas B. Edsall)
Here are just a few of the longstanding problems plaguing
American education: a generalized decline in
literacy; the faltering international performance of American students; an
inability to recruit enough qualified college graduates into the teaching
profession; a lack of trained and able substitutes to fill teacher shortages;
unequal access to educational resources; inadequate funding for schools;
stagnant compensation for teachers; heavier workloads; declining prestige; and
deteriorating faculty morale.
Nine-year-old students earlier this year revealed “the
largest average score decline in reading since 1990, and the first ever score
decline in mathematics,” according to the National Center for Education
Statistics. In the latest comparison of
fourth grade reading ability, the United States ranked below 15 countries,
including Russia, Ireland, Poland and Bulgaria.
Doris Santoro, a professor of education at Bowdoin, wrote by email in response to my query regarding the morale of public-school teachers:
“Teachers are not only burnt out and
undercompensated, they are also demoralized. They are being asked to do things
in the name of teaching that they believe are mis-educational and harmful to
students and the profession. What made this work good for them is no longer
accessible. That is why we are hearing so many refrains of I’m not leaving the
profession, my profession left me.”
In an August 2022 paper, Is There a National
Teacher Shortage?, Tuan D. Nguyen and Chanh B. Lam,
both of Kansas State University, and Paul
Bruno of the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign wrote that
they
“Systematically examined news reports, department of
education data, and publicly available information on teacher shortages for
every state in the U.S. We find there are at least 36,000 vacant positions
along with at least 163,000 positions being held by underqualified teachers,
both of which are conservative estimates of the extent of teacher shortages
nationally.”
In an email, Nguyen argued, “The current problem of teacher
shortages (I would further break this down into vacancy and
under-qualification) is higher than normal.” The data, Nguyen continued,
“indicate that shortages are worsening over time, particularly over the last few
years. We do see that southern states (e.g., Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia and
Florida) have very high vacancies and high vacancy rates.” He pointed out that
“the cultural war issues have been prominent in some of these states (e.g.,
Florida).”
I asked Josh Bleiberg,
a professor of education at the University of Pittsburgh, about trends in
teacher certification. He emailed back: “The number of qualified teachers is
declining for the whole country and the vast majority of states. The number of
certified teachers only increased in the District of Columbia, Massachusetts,
North Dakota, and Washington. Those increases were relatively small and likely
didn’t keep up with enrollment increases.”
These declines in the numbers of qualified teachers take place
in an environment of stagnant or declining economic incentives, he wrote: “Wages
are essentially unchanged from 2000 to 2020 after adjusting for inflation.
Teachers have about the same number of students. But teacher accountability
reforms have increased the demands on their positions. The pandemic was very
difficult for teachers. Their self-reported level of stress was about as twice as
high during the pandemic compared to other working adults. Teachers had to
worry both about their personal safety and deal with teaching/caring for
students who are grieving lost family members.”
According to the National
Center for Education Statistics, the number of students graduating
from college with bachelor’s degrees in education fell from 176,307 in 1970-71
to 104,008 in 2010-11 to 85,058 in 2019-20.
In a study of teachers’ salaries, Sylvia Allegretto,
a research associate at the Economic Policy
Institute, found a
growing gap between the pay of all college graduates and teacher salaries from 1979
to 2021, with a sharp increase in the differential since 2010. In 1979, the
average teacher weekly salary (in 2021 dollars) was $1,052, 22.9 percent less
than other college graduates’, at $1,364. By 2010, teachers made $1,352 and
other graduates made $1,811. By 2021, teachers made $1,348, 32.9 percent less
than what other graduates made, at $2,009.
These gaps play a significant role in determining the quality of
teachers, according to a study by Eric
A. Hanushek of Stanford; Marc Piopiunik,
a senior researcher at the CESifo Network;
and Simon Wiederhold,
a professor at the Catholic University of Eichstätt-Ingolstadt, The
Value of Smarter Teachers: International Evidence on Teacher
Cognitive Skills and Student Performance.
“We find,” they write, “that teachers’ cognitive skills differ
widely among nations — and that these differences matter greatly for students’
success in school. An increase of one standard deviation in teacher cognitive
skills is associated with an increase of 10 to 15 percent of a standard
deviation in student performance.” In addition, they find “that teachers have
lower cognitive skills, on average, in countries with greater nonteaching job
opportunities for women in high-skill occupations and where teaching pays
relatively less than other professions. These findings have clear implications
for policy debates here in the U.S., where teachers earn some 20 percent less
than comparable college graduates.”
Using data for 33 countries collected by the O.E.C.D.’s Program
for the International
Assessment of Adult Competencies, the scholars found that the
cognitive skills of teachers in the United States fell in the middle ranks: “Teachers
in the United States perform worse than the average teacher sample-wide in
numeracy, with a median score of 284 points out of a possible 500, compared to
the sample-wide average of 292 points. In literacy, they perform slightly
better than average, with a median score of 301 points compared to the
sample-wide average of 295 points.”
Raising teacher skill levels can significantly improve student
performance, they argue: “Increasing teacher numeracy skills by one standard
deviation increases student performance by nearly 15 percent of a standard
deviation on the PISA math test. Our estimate of the effect of increasing
teacher literacy skills on students’ reading performance is slightly smaller,
at 10 percent of a standard deviation.”
In addition, “the impact of teacher skills is somewhat larger
for girls than for boys and for low-income students compared to wealthier
students, particularly in reading.”
How, then, to raise teacher skill level in the United States?
Hanushek and his two colleagues have a simple answer: raise teacher pay to make
it as attractive to college graduates as high-skill jobs in other fields.
They have one caveat: “While making it clear that a more skilled
teaching force is generally found in countries with higher relative salaries,
policymakers will need to do more than raise teacher pay across the board to
ensure positive results. They must ensure that higher salaries go to more
effective teachers.”
The teaching of disputed subjects in schools has compounded many
of the difficulties in American education. Walking a Fine Line
— Educators’ Views on Politicized Topics in Schooling, a RAND
report by Ashley
Woo and eight fellow researchers, published earlier this year,
was based on surveys conducted in January and February 2022 of 2,360 K-12 teachers
and 1,540 principals. The researchers found that controversies over critical
race theory, sex education and transgender issues — aggravated by divisive
debates over responses to Covid and its aftermath — are inflicting a heavy toll
on teachers and principals.
“On top of the herculean task of carrying out the essential
functions of their jobs,” they write, “educators increasingly find themselves
in the position of addressing contentious, politicized issues in their schools
as the United States has experienced increasing political polarization.”
Teachers and principals, they add, “have been pulled in multiple
directions as they try to balance and reconcile not only their own beliefs on
such matters but also the beliefs of others around them, including their
leaders, fellow staff, students, and students’ family members.”
These conflicting pressures take place in a climate where
“emotions in response to these issues have run high within communities,
resulting in the harassment of educators, bans against literature depicting
diverse characters, and calls for increased parental involvement in deciding
academic content.”
The stress of dealing with all this is much more prevalent among
educators than it is among workers in other fields, according to the study: “Forty-eight
percent of principals and 40 percent of teachers reported that the intrusion of
political issues and opinions in school leadership or teaching, respectively,
was a job-related stressor. By comparison, only 16 percent of working adults
indicated that the intrusion of political issues and opinions in their jobs was
a source of job-related stress. This difference demonstrates the especially
salient impact that politicized issues have had in schools compared with other
workplaces.”
The issue of systemic
racism provides an example of the intellectual and moral
cross-pressures on educators as teaching becomes increasingly politicized. Many
conservative legislatures have restricted
or prohibited teaching students that there is such a thing as
systemic racism in the United States.
The RAND survey asked educators whether “they believed in the
existence of systemic racism, which we defined as the notion that racism is
embedded in systems and structures throughout society rather than present only
in interpersonal interactions.” The result? “Sixty percent of teachers and 65
percent of principals reported believing that systemic racism exists. Only
about 20 percent of teachers and principals reported that they believe systemic
racism does not exist, and the remainder were not sure. More teachers of color
(69 percent) reported believing in the existence of systemic racism than White
teachers (57 percent). We saw a similar trend among principals: 79 percent of
principals of color reported their belief in the existence of systemic racism
compared with 61 percent of White principals. Nearly all Black or African
American principals (92 percent) and teachers (87 percent) reported believing
that systemic racism exists.”
White educators working in predominantly white school systems
reported substantially more pressure to deal with politically divisive issues
than educators of color and those working in mostly minority schools:
“Forty-one percent of white teachers and 52 percent of white teachers and
principals selected the intrusion of political issues and opinions into their
professions as a job-related stressor, compared with 36 percent of teachers of
color and principals of color.” In addition, they write, “Teachers (46 percent)
and principals (58 percent) in schools with predominantly white students were
significantly more likely than teachers (34 percent) and principals (36
percent) in schools with predominantly students of color to consider the
intrusion of political issues and opinions as a job-related stressor.”
A 54 percent majority of teachers and principals said there
“should not be legal limits on classroom conversations about racism, sexism,
and other topics,” while 20 percent said there should be legislated constraint.
There were significant racial differences on this issue: “62 percent of
principals of color and 59 percent of teachers of color opposed such legal
limits, compared with 51 percent of white principals and 52 percent of white
teachers.”
Voters, in turn, are highly polarized on the teaching of issues
impinging on race or ethnicity in public schools. The
Education Next 2022 Survey asked, for example: “Some people
think their local public schools place too little emphasis on slavery, racism
and other challenges faced by Black people in the United States. Other people
think their local public schools place too much emphasis on these topics. What
is your view about your local public schools?”
The responses of Democrats and Republicans were mirror opposites
of each other. Among Democrats, 55 percent said too little emphasis was placed
on slavery, racism and other challenges faced by Black people, and 8 percent
said too much. Among Republicans, 51 said too much and 10 percent said too
little.
Because of the lack of reliable national data, there is
widespread disagreement among scholars of education over the scope and severity
of the shortage of credentialed teachers, although there is more agreement that
these problems are worse in low-income, high majority-minority school systems
and in STEM and special education faculties.
A study based on a survey last summer of 682 public high school
principals and on 32 follow-up interviews, conducted by the Institute for
Democracy, Education and Access at U.C.L.A. and the Civic Engagement Research
Group at the University of California-Riverside, Educating
for a Diverse Democracy: The Chilling Role of Political Conflict in
Blue, Purple, and Red Communities, found:
“Public schools increasingly are targets of
conservative political groups focusing on what they term 'Critical Race
Theory,' as well as issues of sexuality and gender identity. These political
conflicts have created a broad chilling effect that has limited opportunities
for students to practice respectful dialogue on controversial topics and made
it harder to address rampant misinformation. The chilling effect also has led
to marked declines in general support for teaching about race, racism, and
racial and ethnic diversity.”
These political conflicts, the authors wrote, “have made the
already hard work of public education more difficult, undermining school
management, negatively impacting staff, and heightening student stress and
anxiety. Several principals shared that they were reconsidering their own roles
in public education in light of the rage at teachers and rage at
administrators’ playing out in their communities.”
Since 2010 there has been a cumulative decline in four key measures shaping the attractiveness of the teaching profession. In a November 2022 paper, The Rise and Fall of the Teaching Profession: Prestige, Interest, Preparation, and Satisfaction Over the Last Half Century, Matthew Kraft of Brown University and Melissa Arnold Lyon of the University at Albany, State University of New York tracked trends on “four interrelated constructs: professional prestige, interest among students, preparation for entry, and job satisfaction” for 50 years, from the 1970s to the present and found “a consistent and dynamic pattern across every measure: a rapid decline in the 1970s, a swift rise in the 1980s, relative stability for two decades, and a sustained drop beginning around 2010. The current state of the teaching profession is at or near its lowest levels in 50 years.”
The analysis by Kraft and Lyon poses a crucial issue for those
concerned about the quality of teaching in public schools: “Growing
dissatisfaction and burnout among teachers in the wake of the pandemic and new
state laws restricting discourse on racism and sexuality in schools have set
ablaze a long smoldering question: Who among the next generation of college
graduates will choose to teach?”
Some of the specifics in the Kraft-Lyon study: “Perceptions of
teacher prestige have fallen between 20 percent and 47 percent in the last
decade to be at or near the lowest levels recorded over the last half century.
Interest in the teaching profession among high school seniors and college
freshmen has fallen 50 percent since the 1990s, and 38 percent since 2010,
reaching the lowest level in the last 50 years. The number of new entrants into
the profession has fallen by roughly one third over the last decade, and the
proportion of college graduates that go into teaching is at a 50-year low.
Teachers’ job satisfaction is also at the lowest level in five decades, with
the percent of teachers who feel the stress of their job is worth it dropping
from 81 percent to 42 percent in the last 15 years.”
The combination of these factors — declining prestige, lower pay
than other professions that require a college education, increased workloads,
and political and ideological pressures — is creating both intended and
unintended consequences for teacher accountability reforms mandating tougher
licensing rules, evaluations and skill testing.
In their July 2020 paper, Teacher
Accountability Reforms and the Supply and Quality of New Teachers, Kraft, Eric
Brunner of the University of Connecticut, Shaun
M. Dougherty of Boston College and David Schwegman of
American University describe the mixed results of the wave of state-level
adoption of “a package of reforms centered on high-stakes evaluation systems: We
find that accountability reforms reduced the number of newly licensed teacher
candidates and increased the likelihood of unfilled teaching positions,
particularly in hard-to-staff schools. Evidence also suggests that reforms
increased the quality of newly hired teachers by reducing the likelihood that
new teachers attended unselective undergraduate institutions.”
In addition, Kraft, Brunner, Dougherty and Schwegman write: “Evaluation
reforms also appear to have reduced teacher satisfaction and autonomy. We find
that evaluation reforms resulted in a 14.6 percentage point drop in the
likelihood that teachers Strongly Agree that they are satisfied with being a
teacher. We find a 5.7 percentage point decrease in the probability that new
teachers Strongly Agree that they have control over the content and skills they
teach and an 8.9 percentage point drop in the probability that new teachers Strongly
Agree that they have control over their teaching techniques.”
The authors’ conclusion provides little comfort: “Education
policy over the past decade has focused considerable effort on improving human
capital in schools through teacher accountability. These reforms, and the
research upon which they drew, were based on strong assumptions about how
accountability would affect who decided to become a teacher. Counter to most
assumptions, our findings document how teacher accountability reduced the
supply of new teacher candidates by, in part, decreasing perceived job
security, satisfaction and autonomy.”
The reforms, Kraft and colleagues continued, increased “the
likelihood that schools could not fill vacant teaching positions. Even more
concerning, effects on unfilled vacancies were concentrated in hard-to-staff
schools that often serve larger populations of low-income students and students
of color. We find that evaluation reforms increased the quality of newly hired
novice teachers by reducing the number of teachers that graduated from the
least selective institutions. We find no evidence that evaluation reforms
served to attract teachers who attended the most selective undergraduate
institutions.”
In other words, the economic incentives, salary structure and work-life
pressures characteristic of public education employment have created a climate
in which contemporary education reforms have perverse and unintended
consequences that can worsen rather than alleviate the problems facing school
systems. If so, to improve the overall quality of the nation’s more than three
million public schoolteachers, reformers may want to give
priority to paychecks, working conditions, teacher autonomy and punishing
workloads before attempting to impose higher standards, tougher evaluations and
less job security.
The New York Times, December 14, 2022
Thomas B. Edsall contributes a weekly column from Washington,
D.C., on politics, demographics and inequality.




