« One Contrary Entrepreneur Keeps Jobs in US | Service and Information Sectors Show Major Growth in Q2 »
September 14, 2004
Watch What They Do; Don't Listen to What They Lobby For
Competition in domains that were once thought to be permanent governmental monopolies is proving to be effective in many arenas. Certainly schools have been one of the modern success stories of privatization. In today's Tennessean it seems that public school teachers in Nashville (yes, those same public school teachers who fight the creation of charter schools and lobby for more and more and more money without any accountability) agree that competition and markets really do work.
"More than one out of every four Metro teachers, or 28.6%, send their children to private school, according to a study released last week."
So, how does this compare to the overall population in Nashville? Teachers are twice as likely to send their kids to private schools as the average family in Nashville.
What could possibly be the reason behind this startling statistic?
Well, School board Vice Chairwoman Kathy Nevill thinks it must be racism. "A lot of it stems back to the same reason the community left the school system — they are scared to death of busing. To some degree they are still scared to death of diversity."
The Director of Nashville Pedro Garcia "had not seen the report and questioned its accuracy." He has gathered his own data. "'I talk to lots of teachers, and I know where they send their kids. I don't believe it's anywhere that high.'" But if the data proves to be true, isn't that a call to action, Dr. Garcia?
"If the report holds up, Garcia said, he is not overly concerned. 'Teachers can send their kids wherever they choose,' he said."
Well, maybe we should go to the teachers and find out the real reason.
"Attempts to interview Metro teachers whose children attend private schools were not successful."
I'll go out on a limb and posit my own explanation. The private schools are better and the teachers know it. Gee, maybe if we all had real choice in schools it might just push public schools a little harder to improve and compete.
Posted September 14, 2004 08:32 AM
Comments
Metro Public schools are some of the worst. I have attended both public and private schools in the Nashville area. I feel lucky to have had the opportunity to go to a private school. A close friend and family member has been a teacher for 11 years. She has taught high school in Tennessee, as well as in two other states. She will testify to the fact that Tennessee public schools need some improvement. The fact that metro teachers are sending their children to private schoolexplains this.
Posted by: G. Ward at September 14, 2004 04:03 PM
Although I do agree that this statistic is somewhat telling, a "blame the teacher, blame the union" tatic oversimplifies a very complex problem. Would competition improve schools? Perhaps, but keep in mind that the public school system has to take students regardless of ability. Private schools have the ability to cherry pick the best students and this enhances their success rate. One wonders how a competition strategy would handle a lower fuctioning student. As another article in this website suggests, sometimes telling a client no is a good strategy. However, in public service sectors this is not an option.
Posted by: Charlotte Howard at September 14, 2004 05:15 PM
Actually, many of the private schools I have helped do not cherry pick. In fact, they get all of the washouts from the public schools. And they make remarkable progress with those kids. Just as it is not always fair to use a broad brush in criticizing public schools, don't stereotype private schools as operating only for the elite
Posted by: Jeff Cornwall at September 15, 2004 03:57 PM
The larger the incentive the greater the results. Of course private schools spend up to three times more per pupil then public. But there are socially adjusted results that last longer then the private schools experience that are only obtained in public schools. To say one is better or worse is not the point. If the teachers of both schools were held accountable for the end results of the students they teach and paid on an incentive bonus basis (ie. a percentage of the first four years of the high school graduates annual salary- sourced from tax records )of all the students that teacher taught, then you would see tremendous educational results in both public and private schools.
It is not healthy for the mind of a child to have to hear the debate about public vs. private education. So take the "high" road and discuss the entrprenuerial benefits of teaching middle school and high school students about the skills needed to start their own businesses and thus create more jobs for their classmates and others regardless if public or private school trained.
Posted by: Jeff R at September 16, 2004 05:14 PM
Sure private schools spend more than public schools, but if public schools were forced to be more competitive and efficient could they not discover the extra funds needed to raise the quality of education? Second, I went to public school and had plenty of friends that went to private school. From my perspective, by attending public school I did not have any "social adjustment" advantage. I believe this is what parents and teachers tell themselves when they have kids who are not in private schools to make them feel better. Ultimately, it comes down to the child and their parents. You get out of your education (secondary, undergraduate, or graduate level) what you are willing to work for-- whether at a terrible public school or a top notch private school. In one school you have to search for your education and in the other you may be spoon-fed. Going to a private school simply raises your probability of success.
Oh and by the way, I do blame the system and the union for the disparity. However, I don't blame the teachers. They are doing their best for the most part with the resources and compensation system that is available. If competition was elevated between schools the union would likely be destroyed (fine by me). Schools would be vying for the best teachers they could get and thus put the power back in the hands of the teachers where it belongs so that they can teach and discipline children more effectively. Strong teachers would have the opportunity to take the best job available to them with no upper financial constraints and likely more autonomy. This would raise the caliber of education at a majority of schools, but at the same time push all the terrible teachers and administrators to certain schools. Is that where we would threaten to send “bad” kids if they don’t straighten up? --TJ
Posted by: TJ at September 17, 2004 09:28 AM
I also attended both public and private schools all over the country growing up. I found the difference to be was WHAT I was studying.
Not to open a can of worms, but the private schools focused on math, science, English, business and social studies. I didn’t have much else besides PE. In the public schools I found that a large portion of my time was spent parenting. I spent a significant amount of time in sex ed, drivers ed, diversity classes, and various others. I watched channel 1 for an hour every day, where in private school we read for 1 hour. Also, in the more rough schools I went to, a large portion of a teachers time was spent disciplining students not teaching (through no fault of there own). In summary, the primary difference I found was just the time spent learning useful things in private school (things that helped me in college and in the business world). The things I was supposed to learn (ie sex, how to drive, diversity, why it is OK to burn our flag in front of our school and such) in the public school I had pretty much figured out on my own.
I don’t see how spending more money would help the public schools. I learned more reading in kindergarten that I did watching channel 1. I learned more in a math book in a private school that I did in public school on my new Dells’ math tutor program.
I think the public schools curriculum should go back to teaching rather than parenting. I think what they are teaching is why private is more successful that public
Posted by: Daniel B. Rose at September 17, 2004 11:59 AM
I believe Daniel's statement is partially true about public school teachers having to do the parenting of students. Coming from a family with two parents who taught in the public high school system for over 20 years each, I've seen the other side of public schools that many students don't get to see. Over the last 20 years, the social acceptance of how children should be disciplined has dramatically changed. Where teachers used to be respected as authoritative figures, they are not being treated as such any more. In the public sector, if a student "acts up", the teacher can basically tell them to "stop or I'll say stop again." The ability to remove these behaviorial problems has been taken out of the hands of the teachers in the public systems because of parents. If parents don't want their kids to be disciplined at school, then they need to take care of the problems at home.
I believe the majority of people reviewing this blog would be shocked to hear some of the stories I've heard over years from public school officials and teachers about what students have to deal with at home because of poor parenting. The teachers know what kinds of things these kids are dealig with at home. And I believe the teachers realize that ultimately, the power to create either a good or bad learning environment rests in the students' hands because the teachers are somewhat powerless to deal with some students in public schools. On the other hand, with private schools, the school is much more selective with students and has the ability to discipline problem kids. Thus if I had the choice of sending my kid to a class that has disruptive children that continually get sent back to class because they haven't done anything "bad enough" to be removed from the class versus a private school where the behavioral problems can be (somewhat) eliminated because they can remove kids from their schools, I would choose the private school. I don't believe the materials taught in each school system are that different, it ultimately comes down to the amount of quality time teachers can "teach" rather than "parent."
Posted by: Melissa Greene at September 24, 2004 01:15 PM
It is no surprise that the Metro school teachers send their kids to private schools. My mother is a kindergarten teacher in Metro, and gets almost no support from the administration, the board, etc. The children are bussed from all over the city, with no real rhyme or reason why they are zoned where they are. I was sent to private school because my mother saw first hand how disorderly the public school system really is in Nashville. They are worried about how they look in the public eye, but don't really seem to care what kind of education the children get. Every year, my mother's children get wilder and more rambunctious, and to discipline them is almost taboo. Major changes need to be made in the Metro school system, and in my opinion, that should start with Dr. Garcia.
Posted by: Harry Mayo at September 29, 2004 11:25 AM
I am amazed at what I just read! Not that Metro teachers are sending their kids to private schools. I teach at a Metro highschool, and I wouldn't dream of sending my children into such chaos. I am amazed at Pedro Garcia's comment and that of Vice chairwoman, Kathy Nevill. Scared of bussing, scared of diversity. I think those are valid things to be scared of, based on the way we have handle them so far, but we have bigger, more obvious problems than that.
First of all, without prejudice, I'd like to say that this is America. The Mexicans, etc., who have shown up here didn't come for no reason. They've come because we have a higher quality of life. We have high standards, and that's why we have a higher quality of life. We are the best. So, what have we in Metro done? Put them in charge. How does that make sence? Metro schools are not the best. They are the worst I have ever seen. I talk to a lot of teachers too, and I know where they send their kids too, and I know why. How odd for Pedro to not be "overly concerned". Guess what Pedro, teachers don't make a lot of money, and to choose to send our children to private schools instead of the public schools we work in is a huge financial burden. Not something we would do without big, big, valid reasons. This is a fantastic indicator that there is a problem you need to deal with.
You don't have to be prejudiced to just state the fact-based information, and the facts are that I see blacks and Mexicans in charge, and another fact is that their standards have never been the high standards the majority of us hold ourselves to. I know there are reasons for that, and it doesn't matter what the reasons are. These are the facts.
I have all kinds of students. Black, white, mexican, etc. They are all kids, and equal percentages of trouble come from each group from what I can see. The trouble is in the school leadership, and in parental involvement in these kids lives.
The blame can't be placed on the teachers. Our hands are tied. Our principals are unsupportive, irresponsible, and apparently only care about what it looks like to the board and higher ups. Why just recently I saw the principal of my own school on TV. My he sounded good, but his words reflected nothing of what I see at school each day. We have inexperienced assistant principals (in their 20s), and a head principal who stands around with his hands in his pockets in the hallways, and won't even make eye contact with teachers (wonder why), let alone have a discussion about what we can do to make our school the best we can for all. I have never had two words with this principal. He has no idea what kind of teachers are there working for him.
Teachers have to fight for small recources like dry erase markers and staples, let alone books. I know of classes, core education classes, who went without textbooks for not one grading period, but almost two. These textbooks could have been ordered and received in just a couple of days, but they didn't even need to be. They were in the school the entire time, not lost, just not gotten together and sent to the teachers by the assistant principal in charge of the task. Not because the principal didn't know the kids had no books, and not because he hadn't been harrassed by the teacher or his secretary to get the books, but just because he didn't get to it. This is just one example of the biligerent irresponsibility I've seen. Where I come from that's firing grounds. Why is it not in Metro? Because it should be hidden, so that it looks as if nothing is amiss in our world.
Teachers have no support for disciplinary problems in the classroom either. I wouldn't have my children in Metro schools just for that matter. I have personally called for security and principals during a classroom crisis and been told that the student won't be removed until he or she has physically injured another student. Of course that's what happens next. Once that does happen the student is sentenced to ISS for a couple days, where they get to relax with nothing to do, which is what they wanted in the first place, then they are sent back to the classroom where they can be again a distraction for students who actually do want to learn.
The students who do nothing but show up for class on occassion, and I mean one, two or three days a week are given 60s on their report cards. If I never see a piece of paper from a student, and they have actually earned a zero in my class, I am instructed to give that student a 60 on their report card. I have been told that I shouldn't care what they get on the report card, because they have to pass the Gateway in the end, so why should I care. Crazy! Now we're cheating the parents who might actually be shocked at a zero, or a 40, out of taking action.
I could go on and on. The article I just read unfairly puts the blame on the teachers. These teachers are Saints, and I don't consider myself one of them, because I won't stay. I've talked to lots of veteran Metro teachers, and they are just resigned to keep their jobs. How sad to have forgotten why we came into the profession, to teach, love and nurture kids. The teachers can't tell you what's going on. They need to keep their jobs, so that they can afford private school.
Posted by: annonymous at November 26, 2004 02:11 PM
at Belmont University in Nashville, Tennessee. He consults with a variety of businesses on start-up and growth related issues, and with larger corporations on re-establishing entrepreneurial cultures within their organizations. Dr. Cornwall's current research interests include entrepreneurial finance and entrepreneurial ethics. He has authored or co-authored four books.
