Last updated on 2015.01.25
When South Dakota Republicans start quoting President Obama to support their own votes, you know they are desperate. I've taken ribbing about the Obama Administration's support for merit pay, a key part of Governor Daugaard's education-wrecking HB 1234, since he mentioned it favorably in the State of the Union address. Rep. David Lust (R-34/Rapid City) put the conservative smirking on the House floor, citing President Obama as a supporter of HB 1234.
Now Rep. Rev. Steve Hickey (R-9/Sioux Falls) invokes Barack Hussein Obama as an expert on South Dakota's K-12 schools:
Obama said, instead of "defending the status quo, let's offer schools a deal" — 1. Incentives to attract and keep good teachers. (Applause.) 2. Reward the best teachers. (Applause.) 3. Grant schools flexibility. (Applause.) 4. Boot the bad teachers. (Applause.)
It's almost spooky how closely those comments parallel HB1234. Furthermore, he acknowledges tight budgets have forced states to cut teacher funding. Yet the narrative here in SD is that the funding was cut because Republicans hate teachers [Rep. Rev. Steve Hickey, "Obama on Ed Reform in SD... Don't Defend the Status Quo," Voices Carry, 2012.03.09].
Frequent blog-flyer LK drops a comment section bomb on Rep. Hickey's "cheap rhetorical trick," pointing that the "logic" of Hickey's argument is akin to saying Republicans have to support ObamaCare because Republican frontrunner Mitt Romney likes RomneyCare.
Permit me the pleasure of tag-teaming with my friend LK:
A. President Obama is perfectly capable of being wrong.
- Democrats are perfectly capable of discerning when our leader is wrong and voting accordingly (unlike the Republican legislators who are wearing their arms out carrying the Governor's water).
- President Obama, like South Dakota Republicans, offers no evidence of specific problems with South Dakota's K-12 schools.
- President Obama's Secretary of Education Arne Duncan is a complete failure.
B. Rep. Hickey is speaking vague generalities about the need for "Change."
- Rep. Hickey is avoiding the central question of proving that the status quo really is that bad.
- Absent such specifics, Rep. Hickey must be arguing that the status quo is inherently bad and "Change" is inherently good.
- Rep. Hickey doesn't really oppose the status quo. He certainly doesn't plan to vote against his District colleagues Sen. Deb Peters and Rep. Bob Deelstra, who have both filed petitions to continue the status quo.
- Rep. Hickey most definitely did not embrace "Change" as an inherent good in the 2008 Presidential election.
C. HB 1234 does not grant schools more flexibility.
- Schools have more flexibility in the status quo. They can implement local teacher reward plans right now, without HB 1234.
- HB 1234 imposes merit pay for the top 20% of teachers as the default policy for all schools. Schools must apply for permission to deviate from that state mandate. That's less flexibility, not more.
- Schools can offer merit pay to any and all teachers and disciplines right now. HB 1234 creates mandatory merit pay limited to math and science teachers. That's less flexbility, not more.
- Schools have freedom in creating their own evaluation system for teachers and principals right now. HB 1234 creates a standardized statewide evaluations from which schools may not deviate significantly. That's less flexibility, not more.
D. HB 1234 does not offer incentives to attract and keep good teachers.
- The Critical Teaching Needs Scholarship Program (CTNSP) is not keyed to any measure of actual teacher quality or student performance.
- CTNSP does nothing to incentivize experienced teachers to improve their skills or continue teaching in South Dakota.
- CTNSP does not offer college students sufficient scholarship money to make up for the income they will lose by choosing to teach for five years in South Dakota instead of in any adjoining state.
If the best argument that South Dakota Republicans can offer for HB 1234 is that President Obama likes it, this bill will go down 70-30 in November. Let's get it on the ballot!
:-). You miss entirely the intention of my post which was to note the curious irony of the SDEA so vigorously opposing policies their leader is presently espousing. And yes, who are we kidding-- the Ed unions and lobby all endorsed Obama and are viewed as a left or Democrat organizations. (And I know the SDEA isn't connected to the NEA but my point stands, ed policy is generally partisan in these circles.)
We will anxiously wait and see if your 70-30 prediction is accurate. Please get yourself outside the ed bubble for a while. You will notice that the governor has a high approval rating statewide despite what you hear in the bubble right now.
Yes, when you know you're wrong, run for irony. And what bubble? Please show me where HB 1234 has a high approval rating.
The ed community is a bubble. Outside of that bubble you'll notice people like this governor.
If you ask people on the street if they think more money is the answer to education reform they will say not necessarily. What should I tell people when they tell me the Christian schools produce higher test scores with far less money and far lower teacher pay? My response is yes we know more money doesn't translate into higher test scores or higher teacher pay in SD.
When I ask people about low teacher pay they agree it's a bummer but point out this isn't a problem unique to teachers - they aren't paid much either - one gave me an earful the other day about teachers only working 9 months a year. My wife always hated hearing people say that;; people say pastors only work one day a week. My point is in the ed bubble you get one narrative and outside of that bubble you'll hear something different.
If you ask people if we should pay good teachers more they will say yes. If you ask people if they think we should offer incentives to attract and keep hard to find teachers (math and science) they will say yes. If you ask people if there ought to be a better way to deal with bad teachers they will say yes. I look forward to the outcome of the vote, I'm assuming they'll get the signatures.
Mr. Hickey includes this quote: "And in return, grant schools flexibility: to teach with creativity and passion; to stop teaching to the test."
Please tell me how the Governor's plan of adding two more sets of standardized tests each year supports what President Obama is espousing.
I suppose they are parallel plans, if by parallel you mean two mirrors showing the opposite image of the other.
Rev Hickey,
I spent two and one-half years working at a Christian school beside one of your legislative collegues. He and I both agree that South Dakota public schools are some of the best in the nation and that this bill will make them worse.
Although I reject the premise that test scores illustrate effective eductation in general, I will accept that your contention that Christian schools have better test scores. The children in those schools also have parents and a church community that helps them understand the necessity of education. (As a side note, I wish parents would be more concerned about whether their children are learning instead of whether their children are getting good grades on their transcripts so that more scholarships are available, but that's a discussion for another day.)
As for your low pay comment, I believe we have reached the point in South Dakota where a slim majority of South Dakotans have developed a perverse pride in being 51st in teacher pay. I don't share Cory's optimism about the results of the referendum, but if you frame it about paying any teachers more, your side will lose votes.
Where is this STEM teacher shortage? The ASBSD and small schools claim they have problems with other disciplines as well. Troy has not been able to explain how the public and students won't perceive paying STEM teachers more as an assertion that they are more valuable than humanities teachers. Perhaps you can give it a try.
Raise wages and make school year-round, approve gender segregation starting in middle school, and allow districts to adopt business casual as dress code.
One of the myths I've had to address as people talk to me about this bill is the myth that nothing in education is measurable. To the contrary, education is inherently measurable-- every teacher gives grades. And as a representative of taxpayers, if something involves money, it better be measurable. I have a kid who never tested well though he's smart and doing well now in college so I appreciate the resentment toward tests. And my wife hated all the teaching to the test that was going on with no child left behind. There are however in our state reformers in education who now have opportunity to implement these reforms and design measurements that work.
Please excuse typos. I tell students to proofread. I should practice what I preach before I hit post.
First off, no bigger Republican in size or life living of the principles that make one a Republican, than I. I greatly appreciate and support our teachers. "Republicans" do not hate teachers.
I care not one wit who is popular or who is not, it has nothing to do with the value of the legislation; however, it can not be ruled out as a factor when it comes time to sell people on the matter when they go to vote.
The SD Republican party is now shoved into a corner where they will be touting how President Obama's socialist ideas were bad for America; however, we have a "Republican" controlled state government that has enacted some of the very same measures here in SD: Obamacare, Crony Capitalism programs, Obama's ideas on education reform, etc., etc.
Ooops, there I go again, not going along with the process or blindly following two former life long Democrats registered Republican just to run for office "Leaders" to take my cues on what being a Republican is about.
HB 1234 and SB 70 were two of my least favorite bills of the session, I might have to include the other one that wanted to give the Cosmetology Commission the authority to administratively fine my barber up to $5,000. For the record, I voted & spoke against all three.
Steve, I didn't ask about whether people like the Governor. I asked about people liking HB 1234. Where are the people who support this bill?
And now you even indict with your own child's experience the validity of tests in measuring student achievement? Wow— what basis is left for teacher evaluations that place 50% weight on test scores?
I guess I don't need to campaign hard to repeal HB 1234. I just need to let Rep. Hickey keep talking.
How many barber, bait, pawn, and gun shops have these bumper stickers for sale?
Bet me: Reps. Nelson and Hickey know where they are.
Larry, you really need to get a clue. Or simply stop by and call me a racist in front of my beautiful brown wife or my half Japanese daughters. We could all use more laughs at you expense.
Daugaard and cohorts are those in a bubble. It is the bubble that deludes them into believing that policies and procedures that have failed everywhere else will mysteriously produce excellent results in South Dakota. It is a bubble of insanity.
The one thing we can trust is that the President will come with a fair way of issuing merit, I don't see where that's possible. Sorry Stace, but while you and a few others are the exceptions, the Republicans want education moved from public to private.
I think that private schools have better test scores LK was right that the parents and churches are involved more with the students.
But what about what the public schools who don't have students with parents who are involved or simgle parent home where the one parent might be holding down 2 or more jobs and can't be as invloved. The schools I think do a tremendous job with these kids.
Schools are aren't made for a one-size-fit approach and that is what the Republicans an GDD don't understand
We all inhabit our own professional/vocational bubble. We usually respect that those in their particular bubble have expertise in it that we who are outside of it do not. I do not consider myself qualified to tell lawyers or doctors or farmers or pastors or salesmen or carpenters how to do their job, though I often wish they would do it differently. Why is it that we all feel justified in shaking up the world of education with the flavor of the month, while not respecting what those in the education field are telling us?
Careful, Owen! Comparing private schools to public schools is tricky business: different tests, different demographics. But when you clear out the socioeconomic differences (i.e., the fact that your private school families are usually richer than public school families), there is little difference between public school and private school test scores. The professors Lubienski have found evidence that public schools may actually outperform private schools on NAEP math scores, that school size and parental involvement don't matter much, and that the private schools' lack of public accountability may drag down their performance. Wow... chew on that!
And Lrad—no doubt! How about a little respect for those of us who do education for a living, Rev. Hickey? Have I ever presumed to tell you pastors how to do your job? (Uh oh... I think I have! :-D )
I here you Cory. Just goes to show how good public teachers do!
How about using the money to hire more teachers, thereby reducing class sizes? That would be golden. Those little one or two room country schools do the best job of educating because of the ability to do more individualization and develop relationships with the students and their families.
Small class sizes are great for teachers too. New teachers and weaker teachers can all develop confidence and grow much better in such a setting. Small classes are a win/win/win.
As if it couldn't get any worse. Why would the GOP ever want to use Obama to prop up their cause?
...because it's all they've got, Mike. They know the bill's a clunker. They know they caved and voted for this bill as a favor to the Governor and maybe ALEC. They know they can't defend the bill on its merits. They thus have to throw all this other spaghetti at the wall and hope something sticks.
Parents need to step up, take responsibility and be there for their kids. We can make the difference.
Rep. Nelson makes clear that the irony of Republicans defending their own policies in their fealty to Obama's policies is greater than we Dems' opposition thereto.
It's a matter of scale, not politics. And it's about jobs for educrats and the education industrial complex.
What we see in HB 1234 is the very real disconnection between upper level management and the productive people who get the job done. The non-productive bureaucracy is content to look at very broad and very insufficient indicators (test scores), crunch numbers about "value added" and make broad pronouncements about "change." But often the change the bureaucracy advocates is seen by the productive workers as ineffective to the productive tasks at hand. At it's worst, such "change" (No Child Left Behind Act) actually hurts education.
I think teachers would love it if the educrats would actually become involved in helping to improve education. It seems the educrats forget they have been driving education in the wrong direction since 1983. The change they are advocating is just coverup for the change they advocated that has failed. Look at all the money dumped into school technology, which the 1990s educrats insisted was going to save educators from "incompetent" teaching. Why are Legislators cowed by these upper level educrats when classroom teachers have far more expertise and experience?
Theocons driving women from earth hater party:
http://www.stltoday.com/news/national/gop-is-losing-women-over-reproductive-health-debate/article_0750e2a8-f9dd-5a5e-84b8-9671b197fb51.html
Donald, again, I'm impressed with your observations. You mention our enormous investment in technology. Indeed, weren't Janklow's effort to wire all the schools and Rounds's effort to put laptops in every student's hands supposed to boost academic achievement? Are we to take it from Daugaard's current accusations that our academic achievement has flatlined that something went wrong with all that investment in technology?
I tihnk Don is combining items.
The technology expenses were needed just to insure our schools didn't become so antiquated as to be vitually archaic. Does anyone think teaching would be relevant to teachers without the technology? I have a supposition but I'm sure there people who have a more informed answer.
Regarding the educrats, Don might have a point but I'd like to know who he thinks are the educrats.
I'd love to see the computers go away for most classes. They are a distraction for many students including my own.
Troy is right in part, but most states went overboard on technology, and overhyped its educational value. I voted no as a school board member on curriculum packages that included a whole bunch of computers and computer software, but got outvoted. Although I was on the Technology Council for our district, I felt a lot of the money we threw at technology was money funneled to curriculum developers and computer venders and away from students. That said, anyone else see the 60 Minutes segment on Khan Academy? Maybe this nonprofit has the answer to integrating technology into education.
http://www.khanacademy.org/
Wait, Troy: are you suggesting that schools sometimes need to spend more money just to keep up with new technology and maintain current levels of performance relative to other states?
BTW--off the subject--but shouldn't legislators during commitee hearings have the courtesy of putting the lap top down or off to the side so that there can be eye contact with those testifying? I wonder how much teacher-student instruction is being harmed with students having their eyes on computer screens rather than the teacher?
Maybe. Sometimes. Don's point is legitimate. What is the key is spending prudently. More is not always better. It can be worse.
Be careful with that point, Troy. Acknowledging that sometimes we need to spend more money to maintain the same results blows a hole in Governor Daugaard's fundamental argument in the State of the State Address that he used to justify HB 1234, that we have been spending more money since 1971 but not getting proportionately better test results.
I agree that more is not always better. HB 1234 is a great example of that.
The new God of South Dakota's Republican Party has spoken!!!!
"STACE NELSON" ""First off, no bigger Republican in size or life living of the principles that make one a Republican, than I.""
The GOP legislators and Governor are missing a key comparison between Pres. Obama's ideas and the Governor's. The Obama administration says that any plan must be designed in close collaboration with the Teacher's Union. SDEA was only brought in after the fact when they thought we could be convinced. When SDEA offered suggestions they were ignored.
Late to this thread table. Sorry. Somehow missed it.
A few comments:
1) For me the point of citing Obama is not so much his solution but his identification of a problem: Educational performance is declining and the STEM shortage will be critical in a few years (retirements vs. pipeline) and it needs new solutions.
2) HB1234 does grant more flexibility. First, they can choose to enact a pay for bonus program without raising local taxes as it is fully funded by the State (no unfunded mandate). Second, the STEM pay and critical needs scholarship will enhance the competitiveness of STEM salaries vs. private sector salaries (math & science is easiest transferable to many private sector jobs)
3) You are correct the critical needs scholarship is does nothing to "incentivize experienced teachers to improve their skills or continue teaching in South Dakota." Cory, I can't believe you actually put that in print. Your Point "D" basically says everything good done about education has to be about you or other existing teachers.
a. The scholarship is about proactively looking to the future to make sure we have sufficient teachers competent in areas where critical needs are projected (this will improve the quality of teachers available and thus student performance).
b. It is ironic that you are calling for a "measure" yet oppose measures of individual teachers and paying for how they perform.
c. It might not fully compensate them for any net differential (after tax and cost of living differences) of teaching in another state. But, possibly combined with spousal job opportunities or family considerations, it can make a difference (especially if one is contemplating leaving education for a private sector job). Again the irony, in effect, you are opposing putting more money directly into teacher salaries. The problem for you is it not universal. If the program does divert aspiring teachers into STEM, the long-term affect will require other disciplines to be similarly dealt with resulting in increases even for foriegn language teachers.
4) I'll bet you a dinner the referendum does not get 70%. In fact, I'll bet you it does not succeed.
b.
Troy...
(1) Obama is not citing any specific problems with South Dakota's K-12 system. Appealing to Obama is just one more example of how supporters of HB 1234 appeal to the vague sense that education at the national level somehow isn't working while avoiding any concrete discussion of specific problems happening right here, in the schools directly targeted by HB 1234.
(2) Flexibility is not having to do something to avoid a really bad default state policy. Schools have no flexibility to get out of the bad merit pay policy imposed for all math/science teachers.
(3) The Governor is selling his plan as being about improving teacher performance and student achievement. The scholarships may be a nice policy, but they are not tied directly to either issue. A college student gets the scholarship before student teaching, before affecting a single student's performance. A scholarship recipient does not lose that scholarship for being a mediocre teacher or for producing students with mediocre test scores.
(3b) Irony is not a voting issue, but every irony HB 1234 supportes cite redounds more strongly against them: Governor Daugaard is telling us we need all this measurement, yet his scholarship policy doesn't measure anything.
(4) I don't bet. But Troy, where are the 30% of citizens who believe HB 1234 is a good policy?
"Acknowledging that sometimes we need to spend more money to maintain the same results blows a hole in Governor Daugaard’s fundamental argument in the State of the State Address that he used to justify HB 1234, that we have been spending more money since 1971 but not getting proportionately better test results."
Cory, Daugaard already blew that propaganda. He admits that HB1234 will cost $15 million, but they had to cut that out of the bill to get it passed. They already agree to spend $8.4 million on Common Core indoctrination to further ingrain the New Age Theology. Daugaard already said it will take a couple of years and tens of millions of dollars to establish a testing system to verify which teachers are the most effective in indoctrination the students with the Common Core New World Order agenda (a component of the Beast of Revelation). And Rep. Hickey is misleading the flock by saying the good teachers will get paid more. Not true. Good teachers do not teach to the tests that are geared to indoctrinating students with the New Age Theology. Good teachers bring into the classroom the other side of the worldview window.
Social conservatives are being lied to by the Republcian leadership, and Rep. Hickey is helping. Check out this recently releashed book:
http://www.amazon.com/Wont-Get-Fooled-Again-Christian/dp/0983723818/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1331560604&sr=1-2
Jascha Heifetz: "No matter what side of an argument you're on, you always find some people on your side that wish you were on the other side."