Senator Obama on Fox News Sunday (April 27 2008)

[HAL 9000 96]

My problem with what you said is 'the low bar' you allege with your opinion of 'qualifications' to hire.

For my son to gain a position at a high school earlier in his career rather than later, he works his rear-end off NOW. He stays in school to get his Masters NOW, not later.

That's not a low bar to get a job.

You know what I cannot stand? It's somebody who talks like an authority about something they don't know jack-squat about.

Stick to your chosen profession where you can buffalo your way through that 100K salary. Your former teachers (if they are still alive) will be laughing.

Those are the hiring practices of rural america's school districts.......These days there's no requirement to have a degree in education, or a Masters as in New York, they will let anyone teach, and that opens to the door to everyone with simply an undergrad. That's the "bar" that's been lowered, and as a result there's a flood of applicants for those jobs that drives the salaries lower.....

If this were the case then school districts would not be so desperate for new teachers and would not be actively recruiting H1-bound professionals for the teaching profession overseas.

Fact is, when education receives the adequate attention it needs in building a truly educated society instead of building a population ready to blindly obey its own government, will be the day your statements in this particular topic will lack the distinction of having earned the aforementioned trophy.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

If this were the case then school districts would not be so desperate for new teachers and would not be actively recruiting H1-bound professionals for the teaching profession overseas.

They say they're desperate for new teachers but I've seen, first-hand, the experience of someone trying to break into the profession. It is tough out there, very competitive.

Someone - and I don't know who - wants to artificially inflate supply in this profession by spreading garbage rumors of a shortage.

[HAL 9000 96]

If this were the case then school districts would not be so desperate for new teachers and would not be actively recruiting H1-bound professionals for the teaching profession overseas.

They say they're desperate for new teachers but I've seen, first-hand, the experience of someone trying to break into the profession. It is tough out there, very competitive.

Someone - and I don't know who - wants to artificially inflate supply in this profession by spreading garbage rumors of a shortage.

Yeah I know. I actually taught for a few years on a temp license in FL and managed to get my department's chair spot after the 2nd week on the job.

However, I will disagree with you on the semantics of the shortage- its not numerically a teacher shortage but rather a budgetary shortage. Between some teaching unions upper echelons stealing teacher pensions and budgetary cutbacks so that we can go to unfounded wars, it is natural to think that many classrooms, both urban and rural, will be just fine with 30+ pupils per teacher and expect that state-mandated (and federally-mandated laws) curricula be executed flawlessly.

[GabiandVi 34]

If you're a farmer that makes 30K a year and you work very hard and can't get ahead then I suggest that you find a new vocation for I'm not subsidizing your existance to achieve parity with mine. This notion that these people don't have responsibility for their own situation is absurd!

That's what this all comes down to. I have it and there are those that want to give what I have to those that don't, and usually those that don't strive to get it themselves.

Many people have had the opportunity to go to college. I grew up in the slums of Brooklyn and I managed to find a way. The opportunities are there so please don't become an apologist for a class of people that had essentially the same choices I had. You'll get noplace in your argument.

Clearly you have some profound misconceptions concerning employment. Firstly, those that are in a profession that stay at one job, with one firm for any period of time is at a very, very distinct disadvantage financially to those that move around progressively. Moving around is the only way to work your way up the salary scale, but you still need a profession that's in demand.

That's how you work your way to 100k, not staying in a job for 30 years at the same company........There's two stratagies; one you stay with the same company or corporation but move to different positions, those that require "hiring", or you seek employment elsewhere. No, it's not 1950 anymore but be happy it isn't!

Lastly, I agree that teachers aren't paid what they should be but again, it's a profession that simply doesn't demand high pay.

With the exception of unionized large metro areas, the qualifications to teach are relatively low. What this means is that any undergrad can aquire a teaching position in most places in this country. When I was in Va the requirement to teach middle school was undergrad degree and two months of a "teaching Certification" course.

As long as it's a job whereby the bar is set relatively low for hiring then it will remain a low paying profession.

You're perspective sure is skewed regarding those that made choices in their lives that now impact their place in the financial pecking order.....

And I'll reiterate, if you're 58 y/o and degreed, and you want to make 100k+, and you're not there, then you've made some bad choices and you need to take responsibilty for your own decisions.....

Okay, I'm offended. I come from a family of 8 children. My father made 6 figures all my childhood and saved I don't know how many millions. At least 5 of my siblings make high 6 figures. (We don't talk about money in my family, so I don't know exact figures and it could be that 7 of the 8 of us make 6 figures. I only know that I do not.)

We all have college degrees. Four of us have masters and two have doctorates. My brothers' and sisters' spouses all have masters or doctorates. (I have a masters.) All of my family members are conservatives. They listen to Rush and like what he says. I'm more dubious, but I understand where they come from and I find the statement, "The rich need to pay their fair share," to be COMPLETELY stupid because the people who say it mean that the "rich" should pay a larger percentage of their salaries and expect fewer services in return.

However, I am shocked when you say if farmers can't make a good living they should do something else. Who do you expect to farm? Do you think we can live without farmers? This sort of disdain for the people who make your standard of living possible is what causes revolutions. I agree that there should be higher pay for higher skills, but we have to have respect for those people. We are not better than them. They make the world go round more than you do. Do you want competent auto mechanics, electricians, bus drivers? Do you want to pay for competency or do you think that people should provide you with good service for pennies?

And your argument that teachers get paid less because it is easier to get a teaching job, besides being completely untrue, is contradictory to your previous argument that if you are a professional with an education, you get paid more. Also, you cannot imagine how difficult the job is.

You say that people with a degree who are 58 and want to earn 100K but aren't have made bad choices. So being a teacher is a bad choice and I should accept responsibility for that. (I'm not 58 but even with a doctorate I wouldn't be earning even 70K as a teacher by the time I reach 58. It caps out before that.) So who would you have teach? Or do you propose we do away with teachers.

I think you have a skewed idea of things. I don't think you are actually as callous as you make out about this. I think you are tired of people considering you to be selfish and greedy and considering your salary within their claim, and you are making broad statements. I agree with you, but you do come off as selfish and greedy and exploitive in your attitude.

[kaydee457 13]

Ok, so confronted with real evidence it's my imagination......You people have some real issues!

[kaydee457 13]

If you're a farmer that makes 30K a year and you work very hard and can't get ahead then I suggest that you find a new vocation for I'm not subsidizing your existance to achieve parity with mine. This notion that these people don't have responsibility for their own situation is absurd!

That's what this all comes down to. I have it and there are those that want to give what I have to those that don't, and usually those that don't strive to get it themselves.

Many people have had the opportunity to go to college. I grew up in the slums of Brooklyn and I managed to find a way. The opportunities are there so please don't become an apologist for a class of people that had essentially the same choices I had. You'll get noplace in your argument.

Clearly you have some profound misconceptions concerning employment. Firstly, those that are in a profession that stay at one job, with one firm for any period of time is at a very, very distinct disadvantage financially to those that move around progressively. Moving around is the only way to work your way up the salary scale, but you still need a profession that's in demand.

That's how you work your way to 100k, not staying in a job for 30 years at the same company........There's two stratagies; one you stay with the same company or corporation but move to different positions, those that require "hiring", or you seek employment elsewhere. No, it's not 1950 anymore but be happy it isn't!

Lastly, I agree that teachers aren't paid what they should be but again, it's a profession that simply doesn't demand high pay.

With the exception of unionized large metro areas, the qualifications to teach are relatively low. What this means is that any undergrad can aquire a teaching position in most places in this country. When I was in Va the requirement to teach middle school was undergrad degree and two months of a "teaching Certification" course.

As long as it's a job whereby the bar is set relatively low for hiring then it will remain a low paying profession.

You're perspective sure is skewed regarding those that made choices in their lives that now impact their place in the financial pecking order.....

And I'll reiterate, if you're 58 y/o and degreed, and you want to make 100k+, and you're not there, then you've made some bad choices and you need to take responsibilty for your own decisions.....

Okay, I'm offended. I come from a family of 8 children. My father made 6 figures all my childhood and saved I don't know how many millions. At least 5 of my siblings make high 6 figures. (We don't talk about money in my family, so I don't know exact figures and it could be that 7 of the 8 of us make 6 figures. I only know that I do not.)

We all have college degrees. Four of us have masters and two have doctorates. My brothers' and sisters' spouses all have masters or doctorates. (I have a masters.) All of my family members are conservatives. They listen to Rush and like what he says. I'm more dubious, but I understand where they come from and I find the statement, "The rich need to pay their fair share," to be COMPLETELY stupid because the people who say it mean that the "rich" should pay a larger percentage of their salaries and expect fewer services in return.

However, I am shocked when you say if farmers can't make a good living they should do something else. Who do you expect to farm? Do you think we can live without farmers? This sort of disdain for the people who make your standard of living possible is what causes revolutions. I agree that there should be higher pay for higher skills, but we have to have respect for those people. We are not better than them. They make the world go round more than you do. Do you want competent auto mechanics, electricians, bus drivers? Do you want to pay for competency or do you think that people should provide you with good service for pennies?

And your argument that teachers get paid less because it is easier to get a teaching job, besides being completely untrue, is contradictory to your previous argument that if you are a professional with an education, you get paid more. Also, you cannot imagine how difficult the job is.

You say that people with a degree who are 58 and want to earn 100K but aren't have made bad choices. So being a teacher is a bad choice and I should accept responsibility for that. (I'm not 58 but even with a doctorate I wouldn't be earning even 70K as a teacher by the time I reach 58. It caps out before that.) So who would you have teach? Or do you propose we do away with teachers.

I think you have a skewed idea of things. I don't think you are actually as callous as you make out about this. I think you are tired of people considering you to be selfish and greedy and considering your salary within their claim, and you are making broad statements. I agree with you, but you do come off as selfish and greedy and exploitive in your attitude.

Shocking!

[rebeccajo 14]

http://www.teacherscount.org/wannateach/faq.shtml#1

What do I need to do to become a teacher?

The steps to teacher certification vary by state, so first you should check with your state’s board of education. The requirements usually encompass the same three basic steps:

1) You must hold a bachelor's degree, and, in some states, a post-baccalaureate or master's degree. For elementary education, you will usually need either a major or minor in education for a bachelor’s degree or a master’s in education.

2) For secondary subjects, you will usually need a degree in the area that you wish to teach. You will need to complete an approved, accredited education program that fulfills student teaching and practicum requirements.

3) In addition to your major, you may be required to show proof of a strong liberal arts foundation. You will very likely need to pass a state test or exam. Some states also require proof that you have taken a variety of college courses in basic subject areas such as English, math, science, social studies, and language. This is especially true for obtaining a license in elementary education.

[kaydee457 13]

Lowering the bar to attract more teachers-

Teacher Preparation and Qualifications

As with teaching practices, there is debate

surrounding the preparation and qualifications

that characterize high-quality teachers.

Compared to other fields, disputes and

ambiguities regarding the knowledge base and

competence required of professionals are

particularly striking in teaching (Sykes, 1990).

There is little dispute that teachers ought to have

a postsecondary education and possess strong

knowledge of the subjects they teach,

but beyond

this there is some disagreement about what

individuals need to know and be able to do in

order to teach effectively.

Moreover, as

researchers struggle to quantify teacher

preparation and qualifications, some critics feel

that studies of teachers’ credentials and

knowledge do not provide enough information

about teacher quality—that is, indicators of

teacher preparation and qualifications do not

directly address the actual quality of instructional

practices. As these debates are highlighted in the

paragraphs that follow, however, it is important to

note that there are some well-established

indicators of teacher preparation and qualifications

that do inform researchers, policymakers,

and education consumers.

Ballou and Podgursky

(1997, 1998) raise important measurement issues

in their discussion of ways in which to attract

“brighter” individuals into the teaching pool

In this discussion, they insist that flexibility in

certification and personnel policies facilitates the

entry of talented individuals into teaching.

The implication of their argument is that extensive

formal training may not necessarily create good

teachers.

The authors suggest that talented

individuals may be less likely to remain in teacher

training programs that require extended

commitment; they may be more likely to seek

more lucrative professions.

According to their logic, extended formal training does not

necessarily reflect teacher quality.

It is important to note, however, the other side of the debate; that

is, in addition to talent and subject-matter

knowledge, prospective teachers must also be

trained to teach children (NCTAF, 1996).

Growing concern that a number of the nation’s

teachers are underqualified to teach our children

has focused attention on the quality of their

preservice learning, and especially on the

institutions that prepare prospective teachers.

These institutions have been criticized for treating

the education programs as “cash cows which are

conducted on a shoestring and used to fund

programs in other fields” (NCTAF, 1997: 31).

Critics argue that schools of education should be

more “intellectually solid” and more connected to

elementary and secondary schools (Holmes

Group, 1986: 2). For example, colleges and

universities should improve the screening process

of teacher candidates to weed out weak students

(Holmes Group, 1986), and these prospective

teachers should be required to have academic

majors in the fields they will eventually teach

(Ravitch, 1998).

Criticisms have also been launched at

certification policies. Critics argue that setting

standards and not enforcing them has increased

the number of underqualified teachers in

American schools.

These concerns were reflected

in a recent speech by Education Secretary

Richard Riley to the National Press Club

(September 1998). In that speech, Secretary

Riley implored the nation’s colleges and

universities to do a better job of preparing

teachers and challenged every state to eliminate

emergency certification.

study

[Ban Hammer 13,355]

my mother had a master's in teaching, and her salary was around 45k a year. imo not much considering the degree she had plus the daily responsibility.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

With respect to lowering the bar for teachers, I dont' know what's happening in other states. But here in NJ, the bar hasn't been lowered. My wife works in a school that has many long-time teachers and the new teachers are the only ones who have all the degrees (completed and in-progress) and test scores they are required to have. A good majority of the older teachers do not and are still resisting having to go do it. They risk being laid off this year for their failure to comply.

[rebeccajo 14]

Kaydee -

First you state the bar is low to teach.

When it is shown to you that the bar is not as low as you would have us believe, you then start a discussion about how qualied these individuals are.

I suppose that in your profession, the skill set to enter your field is equitable to the skill set required to maintain your job?

[kaydee457 13]

Kaydee -

First you state the bar is low to teach.

When it is shown to you that the bar is not as low as you would have us believe, you then start a discussion about how qualied these individuals are.

I suppose that in your profession, the skill set to enter your field is equitable to the skill set required to maintain your job?

I only showed a study that suggest that lowering the standards are a way to attract better teachers........In the study it suggest that in order to recruit these "brighter" teachers that perhaps they shouldn't require such "extensive

formal training may not necessarily create good teachers. "

It is a fact that in many rural districts, such as I cited in Virginia earlier, the districts are indeed hiring teachers with no teaching credentials and Certifying them through "Conditional Licensing". This is inline with the findings of the study which suggest that teachers require no "extensive formal training may not necessarily create good teachers. "

And I'll go back to see if I stated that the "bar is low to teach" because If I did then I did so out of context. My points always been that the bar's been lowered to hire teachers in many areas of the country, that's a fact.

I did say that it's not the case in larger metro areas such as New York City, and surrounding suburbs, Chicago, and surrounding suburbs, and everywhere else where unions have strongholds.

You seem to be arguing with me for you have the idea I agree with these hiring practices, I do not. I simply see these practices resulting in lower teaching salaries.......

I suppose that in your profession, the skill set to enter your field is equitable to the skill set required to maintain your job?

Yes it is......certainly, at the entry level it is.

[rebeccajo 14]

You said 'the qualifications to teach are relatively low'.

Would you like to keep digging your hole? Are we going to get into a discussion about the definition of 'to'?

If so, that's rather Clinton-esque, don't you think?

[kaydee457 13]

This is what I said and having read it again I suppose it could be interpreted either way.....

Lastly, I agree that teachers aren't paid what they should be but again, it's a profession that simply doesn't demand high pay.

With the exception of unionized large metro areas, the minimum qualifications to teach are relatively low. What this means is that any undergrad can aquire a teaching position in most places in this country. When I was in Va the requirement to teach middle school was undergrad degree and two months of a "teaching Certification" course.

As long as it's a job whereby the bar is set relatively low for hiring then it will remain a low paying profession.

The bolded areas are fact, at least in Virginia. You can have an undergrad in History, English, whatever and be hired by a school district to teach with the only certification necessary is a 3 yr. Conditional License......

This's opened up the field to many applicants that previously wouldn't have been qualified to teach and is driving salaries lower.

edit: added the word minimum, and underlined....the intent is to say the posted job qualifications of a particular district are low

Edited April 29, 2008 by kaydee457

[rebeccajo 14]

I idly note that citing the State of Virginia as an example is hardly indicative of the hiring practices for teachers in "most places in this country".

Even Thomas Jefferson wasn't that enamored of Virginia.

PS - you don't get to go back and edit your statement to make up for ignorance.

Edited April 29, 2008 by rebeccajo