Short answer: Yay!
Substantial observation: The union has no credibility, here, having unilaterally opposed each and every reform that might result in a teacher being dismissed. At a certain point, the Teachers Unions come across as crying wolf.
The perception, which I find accurate, is that their ends are substantially different from those intent on improving the system. The fundamental goal of any union is to improve working conditions for employees. That is not the same as providing a better educational experience for students.

Yeah, let’s flog the teachers and put 100% of the blame on them for low student test scores. Or based on a 30 minute classroom visit.
8 years after NLCB the achievement gap between minority and white students in reading and math is larger than it was in 1988.
Let’s just close our eyes to racial and socioeconomic inequality.
Instead, we’ll beat down the teachers.

I agree with the action. Reform has to start somewhere
@Naum, to your point, letting go of teachers is not the only answer. There need to be some comprehensive programs for parents also and an overhaul of teaching techniques. In my mind, it’s not a one-answer solution, but rather a multi-pronged approach is needed.

My wife is a teacher, my Mother in Law is a principal. I work with after school programs, I vote Democrat.
But school unions need to work toward fair evaluations that actually have consequences. Research has shown that an average student with three consecutive years of top level teaching will be testing around the 80th percentile. An average students with three consecutive below average teachers will be testing around the 15th percentile. Teachers make a huge difference. School administration makes a difference as well, as does classroom resources, class size, etc. But getting rid of bad teachers has to be part of the solution. There are over 4000 teachers in DC. This fires 5% of them and puts another 15% on notice.
No evaluation will be completely fair, but this one includes 8 observations with multiple observers, it would be hard design one that would be more fair.

Actually this war has been going on since Michelle Rhee was appointed. The bottom line is she wants to break the union and the union doesn’t trust her. They have been in contract negotiations since she was appointed. I guess she decided to stop negotiating.

“Yeah, let’s flog the teachers and put 100% of the blame on them for low student test scores. Or based on a 30 minute classroom visit.”
Or, let’s do what was described above, which you have misrepresented here. A system where tenured employees are, essentially, immune to termination isn’t tenable. Do you agree, or no?
I’m tired of hysterics from the anti-reform camp.

I do believe teaching needs to improve so I support the firing, though not without some severe reservations. I’d like reassurance on two fronts: 1. That controls and transparency are in place to insure that principals can’t fire people for the wrong reasons, such as a personal vendetta or as an intimidation tactic, and 2. That support to retool be offered fired teachers who bought in under the premise they would have a job for life. I just don’t know what happens to displaced public school teachers. I think some people fall into teaching in dysfunctional school systems because they can’t do anything else, and while they ought to be removed from the classroom, they are still human beings …
How do tenured college professors feels about this? Should colleges be allowed to fire professors who aren’t teaching effectively?

I do believe teaching needs to improve so I support the firing, though not without some severe reservations. I’d like reassurance on two fronts: 1. That controls and transparency are in place to insure that principals can’t fire people for the wrong reasons, such as a personal vendetta or as an intimidation tactic, and 2. That support to retool be offered fired teachers who bought in under the premise they would have a job for life. I just don’t know what happens to displaced public school teachers. I think some people fall into teaching in dysfunctional school systems because they can’t do anything else, and while they ought to be removed from the classroom, they are still human beings …
How do tenured college professors feels about this? Should colleges be allowed to fire professors who aren’t teaching effectively?

This is really excellent.
DC’s teachers’ union is out of control. DC tested a really excellent public charter school system that had phenomenal results, but the teachers’ union shut it down.
Nobody sane thinks that public school teachers should have tenure. But that’s what they’ve had in this district for quite a while.
165 teachers were let go due to poor performance (plus 76 for not having license) in a district with roughly 4000 teachers. That’s just barely over 4%.
Not exactly a purge, Scot.

As I read the comments I agree… this is something that needs to be done, though it is not the be all and end all of the problem.
And. as expected, as I have read Naum’s comments over many posts, he simply does not get it.

I live here; 46 years. Fire them; fire more of them. But it’s not just DC. Teacher Unions are for teachers, duh…
- Craig

Yes, there needs to be a way to fire truly bad teachers.
And, how are we gong to help teachers help students where there is no at home support?
And, how do we move folks from extrinsic to intrinsic motivation? Forcing people to learn, punishing people, threatening people can only take you so far. Yet most reforms- and most ideas, including this article- center on just this kind of motivation. We should be focusing instead on igniting passion and inspiring hard work.
captcha- in moderates

I love how the “myopic herd” scrutinizes and blames everything on the teachers. They blame everything on the unions..yet, the NYCDOE accounts for around 18 billion of NYC’s budget. If we calculate, and take NY’s inflated budget; there are 8.5 million people in NYC (1/35 the population of the US). So lets say education is worth 800 billion in our country.
Lets look at the wall street bonuses for profligate and criminal behavior, derivatives in the trillions, bailouts to organizations that failed and took down entire economies.
I mean, please…from a numerical point of view…please…we have 600 trillion to 1 quadrillion of debt/derivatives and obligations. So, the 3 million + middle-class teachers in our country is surely not the monetary CATALYST for our problems.
And as far as accountability; why isn’t Paulson, Geithner, Greenspan, Summer’s, Blankfein, Soros, and the rest of the speculators held so accountable as a “little” civil servant, serving their community.
Let me tell you, those crooks aren’t serving your communities, they are r*ping them, your savings, and your livelyhood. And, for those who think that teachers are welfare-socialists killing capitalism, the fall of capitalism happens when the oligopoly uses “usury” and disgusting monetary manipulation to exploit free markets.
A free market and socialized sectors can co-exist, but we cannot exist with these creeps

A Union is for itself and its members at any cost before all others.
Look at GM~a prime example, a government bail out of their pension plans? Teachers Union is more of the same, look at the teachers fired in Rhode Island was it? Poor scores, refusals to add 20 minutes to an already short working day without unreasonable compensation demands, already @79Kper yr, they were well above the median salary of 29K in that school district. What??
Just like those city council folks out in California..,6 figures a year in a town with median salary of 40K, the list goes on and on..and ITS WRONG!
In this case, the cost the Union is asking for, and not just
in DC is too much and doesn’t give enough value (education)
to the consumer (student).
I sense there’s a movement afoot in America to take back our schools..maybe some other things too but our schools are definitely in the public sight.
If DC follows thru with the other 700 or so put on notice, this will become a huge BLOW OUT struggle. Its time the education of our kids, grand kids and all others be wrestled away from Union control that only cares about its members and NOT THE KIDS they are to TEACH.
I think the teachers will lose, because lets face it~ if they were in a private sector job, they would have to sink or swim wouldn’t they? Don’t you?? Do your job, do it right or you’re done. How is it acceptable that tenured or not, if you aren’t doing your job, you still have one? I’d like that $200pass do not go to jail card wouldn’t you? They have a college degree and that alone will open many doors that are closed to most for the lack of one. Don’t feel sorry for them~feel sorry for the students that don’t have teachers that inspire their passions for science, the arts, literature, instead they drop out, they fail, they game the system.
They shouldn’t get a free pass for not teaching or for using that lame excuse, ‘I get nothing from the parent’s”..
NOT ALL TEACHERS are like this, personally most of mine were great and inspiring teachers. We now need to get rid of the one’s that aren’t willing and able to do just that. We need to seek out others motivated to the pursuit of education and to teaching it.

“I love how the “myopic herd” scrutinizes and blames everything on the teachers.”
There is no such thing occurring here.
“yet, the NYCDOE accounts for around 18 billion of NYC’s budget. If we calculate, and take NY’s inflated budget; there are 8.5 million people in NYC (1/35 the population of the US). So lets say education is worth 800 billion in our country.”
That’s less then $3,000 per person. Are you arguing that we receive, per person, $3k in return on out investment?
“Lets look at the wall street bonuses for profligate and criminal behavior, derivatives in the trillions, bailouts to organizations that failed and took down entire economies.”
Bailouts are a bad idea, yes.
“I mean, please…from a numerical point of view…please…we have 600 trillion to 1 quadrillion of debt/derivatives and obligations. So, the 3 million + middle-class teachers in our country is surely not the monetary CATALYST for our problems.”
This is incoherent.
“And, for those who think that teachers are welfare-socialists killing capitalism, the fall of capitalism happens when the oligopoly uses “usury” and disgusting monetary manipulation to exploit free markets.”
I get the distinct impression that you do not know the meaning of at least three of the terms you have used above.
“A free market and socialized sectors can co-exist, but we cannot exist with these creeps.”
Which creeps?

I am married to a teacher, have several family members who are teachers and I work for a high school in a support capacity. I support the idea of accountability and standards.
There are two big problems that schools need to address however to be fair to the teachers who are scrutinized. One is that the Standards from school to school and state to state are often ill-defined and overly complicated, bloated with non-essentials and vague meaningless verbiage that blurs expectation rather than clarifies them. If a teacher has a curriculum that is not well aligned to clear Standards and student assessments are not also aligned to those standards, then progress will not happen.
Second, achievement goals need to account for where students are at the start of the evaluation period and growth over time. Some students are too far behind to catch up to higher achieving students in terms of a single target. But all students can improve by a reasonable percentage in a year. This doesn’t eliminate a minimal goal, just gives credit for helping a low performing kid get back in the game.
Ultimately the foundation of education is reading for information, writing with clarity (grammar and structure), number sense and math reasoning skills, all encompassed by critical thinking. Bloated standards, poor (or no) curriculum and assessments unrelated to both contribute to the sense of unease teachers feel. Some tenured teachers should be let go for performance reasons, but fairness demands that the expectations are clear and fair as well.

“Second, achievement goals need to account for where students are at the start of the evaluation period and growth over time.”
This is part and parcel of any program aimed at improving student performance. Those who argue that we cannot measure teacher performance across demographic groups remind me of the people who argue we cannot compare baseball players from differing eras.
Everyone’s job is subject to subjective analysis. Sometimes, that analysis is wrong. However, if a manager keeps making the wrong decisions, he or she will be replaced by someone who makes better personnel decisions.
Why should this not apply to public schools? The standards that are currently in place to disqualify certain teachers are a direct response to union standards. If the union standards can’t save you, should you be teaching? I think not.

I am not anti union. My wife and I, when she was a first year teacher, did the background work to show that she was mis-using school funds. She was removed from her position, but was placed in at least four more schools as principal (each time being forced out for incompetence or bad behavior). Without the implicit support of a union, my wife would have lost her job. Her job was explicitly threatened, but without good cause there was nothing she could do.
Now working in a non-union state, I can see people being fired for reasons that would not stand up to real scrutiny. At the same time, very, very few teachers are ever fired for cause. My wife is working in a fairly large district, about 6000 teachers, two years ago only 11 were fired for cause. (Budget cut this year cut almost 700.)

@Allan R. Bevere (#10) wrote:
_And. as expected, as I have read Naum’s comments over many posts, he simply does not get it._
Wow, a put-down framed with impeccable logic, based on diddly-squat.
Truly, would expect a more witty rejoinder than such a vacuous blurb as this.
Again, perhaps there was cause to let these teachers go, but the sentiment of casting blame at unions and teachers, while parents, disparate spending per pupil in rich v. poor districts, teaching to the test, bloated administration (which has increased with the standardized testing edicts), etc.? somehow fades into the background?

Dear Naum—” Let’s just close our eyes to racial and socioeconomic inequality.”=======Have you ever thought about the possibility that the racial and socioeconomic inequalities don’t have anything to do with the race or economic level of the child, but rather the involvement and education level of the parents of the child. Now please listen to what I am about to say. I am a home health RN, and have been in many homes of many very young women with very small children and no father to be seen—stuck in a system that teaches the girls that if they just get pregnant and have child, the gov. will provide a check every month, low rent housing, food stamps and free healthcare, as well as help on bills if they find them too hard to pay. They have no incentive to get a job and take care of themselves, since they could never have access to and could never afford all the above mentioned benefits on a minimum-wage salary. I can’t get all that, and I have a Bachelor’s Degree and make alot more than minimum wage!!! Now I know this sounds harsh—but sometimes the truth is hard to accept–but many of these girls never wanted these children, don’t take good care of them, and don’t spend time trying to teach them or encourage them in any way—as they are too busy taking on cell phones, watching soap operas and daytime talk shows and yelling a cursing at the child for interrupting them. It absolutely breaks my heart, because I know these children have all potential in the world to be smart, strong, self-confident and happy adults—if they just have some love and attention now.
It is so much easier to blame this on “the system” or to just lay it at the feet of racial injustice, than it is to look the REAL problem in the face and get a whole group of people to stand up and take some responsibility. And I agree with you that it is not always the teachers’ fault. How can they maintain order and teach a class of children who have not been taught at home, first.

As a former education reporter I agree with almost all of the above and have much to much to say so will only make a few points:
1. Now is a golden opportunity to clean house. During the 90s and until 2008, school systems, surprised by the “echo” boom and higher-than-expected immigration (the two trends meant many more children than anticipated) combined with high employment and prosperity, scrambled mightily to find teachers, especially for more troubled schools. Baltimore was importing teachers from the Philippines. Prince George’s County would “fast track” career changers–and lose most of them by midyear because they couldn’t stand the dysfunction in the schools where they were placed. Hiring bonuses were a norm. There was no realistic expectation that the less desirable schools were going to get rid of warm bodies with certifications.Most principals simply worked around the dead weight and treated it as a fact of life. Thus, I’m glad DC is taking advantage of this window of opportunity, though I do also worry.
2. Rather than castigate teachers for making “too much,” (and usually, the opposite is true, at least in the areas I covered; the issue was that teachers, police and others couldn’t afford to live on their salaries) we need to hang together and bring lower “median” salaries up to what teachers are making. We have to stop fighting each other, which leads to the race to the bottom, and as someone pointed out, irresponsible CEOs creaming off millions while we quarrel over chump change. How much teachers make is a distraction from the real inequalities in this country.

Kevin #17. Wrote in response to 16, “This (growth over time) is part and parcel of any program aimed at improving student performance.”
Not true. In Illinois, the bar is set for reading for a two day series of tests at a fixed number that is roughly the equivalent of a 19 on the ACT, (the second day of testing counts for 1/3 of the score). 77.5% of students need to meet that target, regardless of where they scored as incoming freshmen. Next year that percent goes up again, and NCLB requires 100% meeting by 2014.
Students in suburb A, whose parents are college educated professionals may enter High School with an ACT average of 18, meaning probably half of the students are at the Illinois target as they start high school. Students in suburb B, whose parents are mostly blue collar two-parent families with a large percentage of single-parent homes, might enter high school with an ACT Freshman score of 13, with a significant number of students functionally illiterate at the start of high school.
Both schools have to meet the same target. Illinois does give some credit for growth in the form of a “safe harbor” target, but that doesn’t really address the issue. School A may do a poor job of educating well prepared kids and get a passing grade. School B may do a great job of improving the skills of poorly prepared kids but may never get kids who can’t read at all to reading College level textbooks in three years. But both schools can be held accountable for improvement over time.
I’m not against standards or accountability. I’m only saying the way things are set up now doesn’t account for the differences adequately.

I think as far as grading the teachers on their ability of teaching you had better thank the government for passing the “No Child Left Behind” bill. My daughter is a first grade teacher and she is told ” do not raise your voice, do not touch the child, do not use words that might offend them” like shut up, sit down now, stop. How are these word abusive EXCUSE ME. how are these kids of any age going to learn anything if you have kids that calling the teacher names, telling teachers they don’t have to do their homework or listen to you and you can’t do anything about it, If he doesn’t do his or her assignments or pass test he still passes to next grade. Then you blame the teachers? That is rediculous,

Coming from a family of educators, I believe that strong teacher evaluations with teeth are necessary, meaning that some teachers need to be dismissed. However, when we look at the big picture, especially in DC, this seems like a futile attempt at reform. Teachers are drastically under-paid, schools are frighteningly underfunded & maintained. Racial & socio-economic disparity is rising, not falling. Teachers are saddled with near impossible odds, are treated (and paid) as though they have little value, then expected to perform at levels that might be possible in circumstances without all these hurdles.
So while there are valid concerns being addressed, while the union is not functioning the way it should, etc. teachers are paying a price while those equally (if not more significantly) responsible for the outcomes are not being consequentially addressed.

@Jamie
“Teachers are drastically under-paid, schools are frighteningly underfunded & maintained.”
I don’t buy this. The median starting salary for a teacher is about $44k per year. The median pay is $65k. Considering that teachers work about 80% of the year, this would translate to about $55k and $81k respectively. Add to that a luxury suite of benefits, and D.C. teachers do just fine, not that they don’t deserve good pay.
In terms of funding, D.C. spends anywhere between $20-26.5k per student (they don’t really keep track). If they are not able to maintain facilities at that price, then even more firings are needed to weed out people who are simply incompetent to do their jobs. It appears as though 20% of those terminated were administration, so that’s a good start.
Of course, the D.C. public school system is notoriously corrupt. Union officials have stolen millions of dollars from the district, in addition to working to ensure that the system remains in tatters. I feel for caring teachers who have to deal with the system these shills have created.
@Dan
“Both schools have to meet the same target. Illinois does give some credit for growth in the form of a “safe harbor” target, but that doesn’t really address the issue.”
It specifically addresses the issue. The safe harbor stipulation exists precisely because it is unfair to expect an inner-city school to meet the same standards as a suburban school.

Given a choice between the relative evils of a union vs. the relative evils of senior corporate management, I’ll take the union any day.
No union ever figured out a way to deny health care coverage until the insured person died.
No union ever caused a huge oil spill.
No union ever sold someone a house they couldn’t afford just to make a commission.
I think half the concern about the teacher’s union is because of poor teachers and the other half is that we’ve been conditioned to dislike unions because they get in the way of management’s quest for profit at any cost.

I don’t think 65K a year is such fabulous money that we would want to lower teach pay, especially in the high cost-of-living DC area.
I understand that we can argue about teacher’s pay–high and low salaries are relative. A corporate CEO would laugh at 65K a year, even with summer’s off; someone slaving at a 30K a year job with two weeks vacation would love the pay and vacation. Rather than fight each other though, we at the bottom, and by that I mean all of us “fewer than 500K a year souls” should, imho, all be campaigning for higher pay and benefits for our brothers and sisters and ourselves. Otherwise, the powers-to-be pit us against each other and divide and conquer.

I don’t think 65K a year is such fabulous money that we would want to lower teach pay, especially in the high cost-of-living DC area.
I understand that we can argue about teacher’s pay–high and low salaries are relative. A corporate CEO would laugh at 65K a year, even with summer’s off; someone slaving at a 30K a year job with two weeks vacation would love the pay and vacation. Rather than fight each other though, we at the bottom, and by that I mean all of us “fewer than 500K a year souls” should, imho, all be campaigning for higher pay and benefits for our brothers and sisters and ourselves. Otherwise, the powers-to-be pit us against each other and divide and conquer.

Kevin S, where is the substantiation of your claim that the median starting salary for teachers is $44,000? Are you speaking of DC specifically? What is the cost of living in DC – fairly high, no?
In my district, beginning teachers start at $32,000 – that is with a master’s degree. That’s a significantly smaller starting salary than nearly any other profession that requires post-grad degrees.

Christine,
I lived for many years in the DC area and the cost of living is much higher there then where I now live in Ohio. $44,000 in D.C. won’t get you too far. It won’t buy you even a modest $400K house in the burbs. It’s a bind, because at that salary you don’t qualify for any social services but at the same time you can’t afford to live at more than a modest level–an apartment, a small car, food, maybe a movie. It’s not starvation by any means, but hardly anything we’d want to begrudge another human, unless we’re all supposed to be on the chain gan or feeling lucky we’re not starving on the streets of Mexico City.

I’m an elementary teacher in Canada with 24 years experience at the lowest scoring school in my district. I received a glowing principal’s evaluation this year but am pretty realistic about my abilities (somewhat above average I’d say). I have no qualms in saying that the low test scores at our school are mainly a function of the lower socio-economic status of our population and the multitude of problems that brings with it. If the Washington policy (where 55% of the teacher evaluation is based on test score results) was in place in my district then I and most of my colleagues would be at risk of losing our jobs – and I can guarantee that very few teachers would apply to work there.
By the way, I consistently put in 50+ hours each week and spend 3-4 weeks at the school every summer .

According to an editorial in today’s Chicago Tribune, the Washington D.C. reform plan has some carrots too;
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/editorials/ct-edit-rhee-20100728,0,62163.story
“Now consider the fate of the good teachers: In June, teachers union members and the D.C. Council agreed on a contract that boosts teachers’ salaries by a stunning 21.6 percent. Job security now rests less on seniority protections and more on performance in the classroom. The contract also includes an incentive plan that gives teachers bonuses of $20,000 to $30,000 ? annually ? if they meet goals that include growth in students’ test scores. Note that we referenced “growth” in scores, not “the highest” scores. The pact rewards teachers who help students of any ability level advance ? not just teachers whose pupils have the most advantages and do well on tests.”
Personally, I would like to thank any teacher who is working under very difficult circumstances in inner city neighborhoods. You see your students struggle with broken families, drugs, poverty, unemployment and heart breaking violence. You probably have had your own life threatened, maybe more than once. You probably know a student who has been murdered. You may feel like you are fighting a wildfire with a garden hose. I can understand how these things can “burn you out”. Not many would take your job, no matter how much you paid them. And yet you stay, because you want to give those kids a chance. And you love them.
I salute you.

“Kevin S, where is the substantiation of your claim that the median starting salary for teachers is $44,000? Are you speaking of DC specifically? What is the cost of living in DC – fairly high, no?”
DC specifically. It came from the NEA, but I can’t find it. Below is an article that suggest the average BA starts at $42k, which means the overall average is higher.
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2010/jun2010/teac-j08.shtml
“In my district, beginning teachers start at $32,000 – that is with a master’s degree. That’s a significantly smaller starting salary than nearly any other profession that requires post-grad degrees.”
That’s below average. That said, it is preposterous that schools require advanced degrees for starting teachers. The fact that earning numerous degrees is the only way to enhance salary is beyond absurd, but that’s a product of the system the unions have created.

“No union ever figured out a way to deny health care coverage until the insured person died.
No union ever caused a huge oil spill.
No union ever sold someone a house they couldn’t afford just to make a commission.”
Unions have a history of using violence and extortion to get their way. Oh, and they are the driving force behind one of the worst public education systems on Earth. And, of course, they have forced our state governments into contracts that are bankrupting them.

@#34 (kevin s.)
The most effective anti-poverty program ever invented was the labor union. ~George Meany
Labor unions, along with New Deal legislation created the middle class in America.
One of the worst public education systems on earth?
Seriously?
For certain, it’s flawed, but “worst”?

“One of the worst public education systems on earth?
Seriously?”
Yes, especially in the areas of science and math. The disparity between our students and those in other nations only worsens as students approach adulthood.

Without unions we’d have no child labor laws, no 5 day / 40 hour work weeks, no minimum wage, no employee safety, no concern for the worker as a human being. Without unions, life would be hell on earth.
Thus, unions are the only organization that have ever really succeeded in restraining Mammon in our society. Unions have done the work of Christ that churches would not or could not do. No church ever forced a business to stop working 10-year-olds 7 days a week, 16 hours a day. No church ever forced a business to offer health insurance.
IMHO, a large driving force behind the poor showing of our educational system is our anti-science society, and a large driving force behind that is Christianity. If we want the US to do better in science, then let’s start basing it in something other than ancient Hebrew mythology.
Of course, if we educate our children like they do in other countries, they’ll start believing in global warming like they do in other countries.

“Without unions we’d have no child labor laws, no 5 day / 40 hour work weeks, no minimum wage, no employee safety, no concern for the worker as a human being. Without unions, life would be hell on earth.”
This is purely speculative (the movement to end child labor began in the mid 19th century), and also irrelevant. Whatever unions achieved at one point, they are still an impediment to good education.
“No church ever forced a business to stop working 10-year-olds 7 days a week, 16 hours a day.”
The church was foundational in eradicating child labor. I don’t think you are very well informed about this topic.
“No church ever forced a business to offer health insurance.”
Given our present system, I’m glad the church has its hands clean of that.
“IMHO, a large driving force behind the poor showing of our educational system is our anti-science society, and a large driving force behind that is Christianity. If we want the US to do better in science, then let’s start basing it in something other than ancient Hebrew mythology.”
Wow. First of all, how do you explain the fact that, as schools have moved away from “Hebrew mythology”, math and science abilites have deteriorated? How do you explain the fact that students of religious and home schools outperform their public school peers?
If your honest opinion was backed by data, we would see these students struggling, by virtue of their proximity to a myth-based education. What one’s understanding of Darwinian evolution has to do with calculus or chemistry is beyond me.
“Of course, if we educate our children like they do in other countries, they’ll start believing in global warming like they do in other countries.”
85% of Americans believe in global warming. That’s a far higher percentage than can offer even a rudimentary answer to what it is.
I find it strange that some people’s entire concept of a science education centers around one or two controversial issues. If students do not believe Darwinian evolution explains the origins of mankind, they can still read data tables, conduct experiments, utilize equations, and do all of the things that make up 99% of science.

Dear kevisn s.,
It was usually the bosses rather than the unions perpetrating violence, as in the Pinkerton forces.

“It was usually the bosses rather than the unions perpetrating violence, as in the Pinkerton forces.”
I am referring to the days when the mafia ran the unions. Of course, those days are not yet expired. Look at Michigan if you wish to know what they have wrought.

If you think a teacher who spends 7 hours a day with a child has more of an influence than the culture the child is immersed in, then we need to pay teachers more.
The fact that American culture is anti-science is well documented. From global warming to creationism to even a basic comparison of the salaries paid science teachers vs. football coaches (over $100K in many cases in high school here), we simply don’t value science as much as other cultures.
It’s pretty easy to blame the evil union for our children’s failings. A lot easier than it is to blame ourselves.
My kid is in private school, and her teachers are paid a good bit less than if they taught in public schools. And yet they are the cream of the crop, the best teachers out there. Why do they choose to work for less money? Two factors: parents and administration.
When you’re writing a check the size of a car payment every month for tuition, you are engaged in your child’s education much more than if it’s free. And when teachers aren’t at the mercy of the politically-driven, top-heavy administration and school board, it’s just a better working environment.

“If you think a teacher who spends 7 hours a day with a child has more of an influence than the culture the child is immersed in, then we need to pay teachers more.”
I don’t think this is the case. What we need, if I grant this assumption, is more options as to how we spend our tuition money.
“The fact that American culture is anti-science is well documented.”
No it isn’t. America is responsible for more breakthroughs based on the scientific method than all the other nations combined.
“From global warming to creationism to even a basic comparison of the salaries paid science teachers vs. football coaches (over $100K in many cases in high school here), we simply don’t value science as much as other cultures.”
One of my science teachers was the football coach. He was an idiot, but I’m pretty sure he believed in evolution. Yes, hiring teachers just to be coaches is the problem, but it is not evidence that we don’t value science. The rest of your examples are simply the hot button issues I previously described, which have negligible impact on our scores compared to the rest of the world.
“It’s pretty easy to blame the evil union for our children’s failings. A lot easier than it is to blame ourselves.”
I believe in creationism, and am highly skeptical of global warming. I blew the average European kid out of the water in terms of math/science aptitude. I’m pretty sure, barring genetic anomalies, that my future children will be able to do the same.
Until you can provide some hard evidence that creationist teaching leads to poorer math/science test scores, you don’t have an argument. The evidence is against you.
“My kid is in private school, and her teachers are paid a good bit less than if they taught in public schools. And yet they are the cream of the crop, the best teachers out there. Why do they choose to work for less money? Two factors: parents and administration.”
That makes sense.
“When you’re writing a check the size of a car payment every month for tuition, you are engaged in your child’s education much more than if it’s free. And when teachers aren’t at the mercy of the politically-driven, top-heavy administration and school board, it’s just a better working environment.”
And so, suddenly, we are in agreement. Create a voucher system. Force the majority of parents to have some skin in the game. Get them involved. Teacher salary will fall where it falls.
None of this has anything to do with whether or not parents believe in creationism.