GaryP

Most Catholic schools will freely (and proudly)admit that their religious doctrine permeates the whole curriculum. When my son was looking at colleges, a christian school made the point that they teach everything from a "christian" perspective. I could not understand how engineering could be approached from that perspective. In fact, it sounds a little scary.

If vouchers are upheld, it will be interesting to see how much governmental oversight of the money will apply. If they are true to their word, many parochial schools won't accept the money because it will mean they can't teach the way they see fit.

And when some point to how much more efficient private schools are in regards to cost per pupil, keep in mind all the services they do not have to offer.

And of course, education is very labor intensive. Private school teachers around here make less salary and have far inferior benefits. Would this make for better schools in the long run?

Oresta

Indeed doctrine permeates the curriculum. When the Detroit Archbishop announced the opening of an inner city school for non-Catholic kids, he was quoted as saying the curriculum was based on the belief that, "Jesus is Lord."

Buffman and Toto are right on the money here. The pro-vouchers are hostile to public education. They have put out the Big Lie that American public education is failing its mission. There is no empirical evidence to support this sweeping generalization.
Failing schools are localized in impoverished urban centers. The failure of public education with the rural and urban poor is nothing new. It has been with us since the beginning of compulsory public education. What is new is (1)the abandonment of commitment on the part of the urban, mostly white middle class that has migrated to exurbia; and (2)the religious right's egregious exploitation of those poor kids left behind in urban schools. Make no mistake, the voucher movement's agenda is to acquire public funds for religious - read Christian - institutions; not to provide a better education for those families trapped in poverty.
The solution to failing schools will not be achieved by diverting public funds out of a universal public achool system. It will come only out of full, national commitment to the problem. It will come only when the Head Start line iten on the national budget exceeds line items for new prisons, defense, and -yes - highways. We need to give this problem the highest priority.

Richard1366

If there is a school that is considered as "failing" in a community and we manage to take some of the children out of the school, provide them with "vouchers" and put them in a private school, we have not solved the problem. The "failing" school still exists and there are still students enrolled there. The only solution is to fix the "failing" school.

If the teachers can't perform, fire them, unfortunately, whether we believe it or not, the teachers unions are running the schools and would never let this happen. Seems as if none of the educational elite want to let the teachers be evaluated and to allow this evaluation be used as a guide for getting rid of the incompetent teachers.

I don't know about the rest of the country, but in the Northern Virginia area, we are all made aware that teachers are underpaid, and usually comparisons are made to other school districts in Maryland and the District of Columbia. Starting salaries for teachers, i.e. persons just 4 years out of high school, is about 32,000 per year for a 10 month contract. This salary, of course, won't make them rich, but also it doesn't represent the very generous benefit and retirement package. Should a teacher get a Master's degree, they are paid an additional $3,600 per year bonus even if the position in which they are employed doesn't require the additional education. Teachers get automatic annual step increases according to a table, but if the table rates aren't increased annualy then the teacher's complain that they haven't been given a raise even though they are making more than they did the prior year.

Better stop now before this becomes a "rant"

PopeInTheWoods

Is the bolded phrase accurate? In most places a teacher is required to have at least a Bachelors Degree from a college or university.

Like you say, no one will get rich from teaching. But in order to attract talented, dedicated educators, schools have to at least provide the chance of some quality of life.

Andy

GaryP

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Richard1366:
[QB]

I don't know about the rest of the country, but in the Northern Virginia area, we are all made aware that teachers are underpaid, and usually comparisons are made to other school districts in Maryland and the District of Columbia. Starting salaries for teachers, i.e. persons just 4 years out of high school, is about 32,000 per year for a 10 month contract. This salary, of course, won't make them rich, but also it doesn't represent the very generous benefit and retirement package. Should a teacher get a Master's degree, they are paid an additional $3,600 per year bonus even if the position in which they are employed doesn't require the additional education.

I think Richard is probably pretty accurate. The Ohio minimum teacheaverage salary is $25,600.

I must make the point, though, that the 9 or 10 month contract really entails a lot of time each day for most teachers. I t isn't the type of job that you just leave for the day and forget.

Allkholollick

My wife teaches and she is often at school for two or three hours after the students leave. But it isn't just the money (which is low) but the general lack of respect that teachers recieve.
I have just finished my degree and I have heard, many times, from other students and from professors that the education majors on campus are to be disregarded intellectually.
If we don't pay our teachers well and support them then we can only expect to get substandard teachers.
I mean, really, it isn't like they are shaping the future of our nation or anything........

Oresta

Long before there were teachers' unions - and I'm old enough to have taught before and after - fully certified teachers had tenure. Getting rid of an incompetent teacher, was and still is, a long and difficult process.

Teachers are not the villains. It has been the fashion of late for the political/religious right to demonize them. It was only after unionizing that they began receiving "decent" wages. When I began teaching in 1957, my school system was among the best for teacher's wages in the country. I began at $4,250 a year. To get perspective on that, truck drivers and factory semi-skilled were better paid. I don't begrudge them that. They earned it, but wages were chronically low for teachers because it was "women's work." Nurses were in the same situation. Wages were still abysmally low until teachers and nurses organized.

[ May 15, 2002: Message edited by: Oresta ]</p>

PopeInTheWoods

(Deleted because my reading comprehension skills have obviously deteriorated recently.)

Sorry Richard and GaryP, just ignore me.

[ May 15, 2002: Message edited by: PopeInTheWoods ]</p>