"Least influential of education's most influential information sources."
-- Education Week Research Center
"full of very lively short items and is always on top of the news...He gets extra points for skewering my high school rating system"
-- Jay Mathews, The Washington Post
"a daily dose of information from the education policy world, blended with a shot of attitude and a dash of humor"
-- Education Week
"unexpectedly entertaining"..."tackle[s] a potentially mindfogging subject with cutting clarity... they're reading those mushy, brain-numbing education stories so you don't have to!"
-- Mickey Kaus
"a very smart blog... this is the site to read"
-- Ryan Lizza
"everyone who's anyone reads Eduwonk"
-- Richard Colvin
"designed to cut through the fog and direct specialists and non-specialists alike to the center of the liveliest and most politically relevant debates on the future of our schools"
-- The New Dem Daily
"peppered with smart and witty comments on the education news of the day"
-- Education Gadfly
"don't hate Eduwonk cuz it's so good"
-- Alexander Russo, This Week In Education
"the morning's first stop for education bomb-throwers everywhere"
-- Mike Antonucci, Intercepts
"…the big dog on the ed policy blog-ck…"
-- Michele McLaughlin
"I check Eduwonk several times a day, especially since I cut back on caffeine"
-- Joe Williams
"...one of the few bloggers who isn't completely nuts"
-- Mike Petrilli, Thomas B. Fordham Foundation
"I have just three 'go to' websites: The Texas Legislature, Texas Longhorn sports, and Eduwonk"
-- Sandy Kress
"penetrating analysis in a lively style on a wide range of issues"
-- Walt Gardner
-- Education Week's Alyson Klein
-- Susan Ohanian
Smart List: 60 People Shaping the Future of K-12 Education
2 Replies to “Unintended Consequences And Well-Intended Edujobs”
This opinion poll seems interesting but I would appreciate more details regarding the methodology.
“survey was conducted from June 28 to July 13, 2011 among 10,212 preK–12 public school classroom teachers”-What was the response rate?
“email-to-online survey method”-that seems prone to a bias
“Figures were weighted”- weighted to what?
Low teacher morale is understandable.
1. Reductions in pay.
2. Loss of any job protections in a highly visible, high public contact position.
3. Public pillory by the release of VAM measures.
4. 13 years of cultural demotion that has reduced a teacher’s influence and respect.
Now, let’s take an HONEST, non-emotional view, at what this means for the profession of teaching in the future.
What would a rational individual do?
1. Teaching has few transferrable skills. Teaching does not prepare one for a better job or a different job. It is a one way street that heads to a dead end. Applicants will avoid the field IF they plan on doing something else later in their lives.
2. Tenure was used to provide a non-monetary benefit that could keep wages low. Teacher wages are still comparatively low when compared to similar professions particularly in math and science. Think of tenure as a bond. In return for job security, teachers accept lower pay. So, without tenure, teacher pay will increase. Applicants do not want a job without training benefits and future job possibilities in return for no job security. That is a no-brainer.
3. Even with removing credentialing barriers to entry, the requirement remains for the right degree and a clean criminal record. Adequate background checks do limit the teaching population and do cost districts a sizable amount of money. The right people want more, and the teaching profession is now offering less.
4. Teaching has lost the cultural battle. Young teachers let go due to poor performance have public data about their job failure. Since teaching is considered a TRIVIAL TASK, employers will refrain from hiring former teachers since they FAILED AT A TRIVIAL TASK. Frankly, young teachers are being given a PERMANENT DO NOT HIRE STIGMA.
To sum it all up, the risk reward profile for teaching is skewed much to the risk side now.
Please be ready for the ADVERSE SELECTION PROCESS: Teaching will now only attract the people it DOES NOT NEED. Those with NOTHING TO LOSE.
The capable have EVERYTHING TO LOSE by becoming teachers. Teaching is a RISKY PROFESSION.
When the reformers see the damage they have done to teacher supply, they will immediately push for higher pay, bu the public is firmly set against it, since they culturally and professionally demoted teachers.
Mark my words. The next ten years are very dark ones for education. Privatizing education will make no difference if the risk/reward profile is NOT changed.
Now, before some posing private sector employee chimes in with “welcome to my world” I might add that after my military career I worked in the private sector. I left the private sector to a senior scientist in a physic lab.
My employer DID NOT PUBLISH MY JOB PERFORMANCE AND DID NOT PROVIDE MY JOB PERFORMANCE TO MY NEW EMPLOYER.
The recommended system will tattoo a scarlet letter on the foreheads of all young teachers who either leave the profession or are asked to leave.
That alone will drive down the supply of teachers.
Good luck teachers. Good God. You are going to need it.