Mitchell school superintendent Joe Graves browns his nose further, floating fudgy facts to fan Dennis Daugaard's fierce fiscal flogging of our fine K-12 schools. Superintendent Graves says South Dakota teachers get the lowest salaries in the nation because we have chosen instead to invest in smaller class sizes:
...according to Federick Hess and Eric Osberg, two researchers on school finance and its relationship to school effectiveness, the number of teachers between the early 1970s and today has grown 50 percent faster than student enrollment during that same time. While some of this can be attributed to IDEA and Title I, much of it cannot. So what has the education establishment been doing with all of these extra teachers?
They have been brought into the profession, in a collaborative though sometimes unacknowledged effort by the federal and state governments, to reduce class size. Hess and Osberg note that if teacher:student ratios were the same today as they were back in the 1970s, we would require one million fewer teachers. Removing that many positions from the teaching roles would mean, theoretically at least, though also persuasively since the percentage of budgets devoted to employee compensation has remained relatively unchanged over the decades, dramatic increases in teacher/educator salaries. In other words, we’ve put our money behind smaller class sizes rather than teacher raises [Joe Graves, "Small Classes, Smaller Salaries," Mitchell Daily Republic, 2014.04.01].
Graves suggests investing in smaller class sizes wastes money, since research doesn't show clear educational gains from lower teach-student ratios. But research also fails to show any connection between smaller class sizes and teacher pay. I put the NEA's data on average K-12 teacher-student ratios with recent data on average teacher salary by state. South Dakota ranks 37th for K-12 teacher-student ratio, 13.7, notably below the national average of 16.0. We all know South Dakota doesn't rank 37th for teacher pay. There are 12 states (including North Dakota, Montana, Wyoming, and Nebraska) and one federal district that hire more teachers per 100 kids and still manage to pay each teacher more than we do.
But the kicker comes if you run correlation on those two sets of numbers. Excel spits out a basic correlation between teacher-student ratio and teacher pay of 0.026. That means there's almost no correlation. If all you tell me is that one state has a significantly lower teacher-student ratio, I can make no reliable prediction about their comparative teacher salaries.
In other words, Graves is blowing smoke. Citing smaller class sizes as justification for Governor Daugaard's budget austerity and South Dakota's teacher-pay penury has no basis in the data.
Slam.
Dunk.
Well said, Cory!
Love the alliteration.
Hrm... Nationally we don't see a correlation between teacher/student ratios & teacher pay. Nor do we see a correlation between teacher/student ratios and student outcomes.
So, if the goal is to pay teachers better, which is the better option?
Option 1): Generate the political will to raise state taxes and/or reallocate state funds from other programs to the education budget to pay teachers more.
Option 2): Break parents of the myth that class sizes impact educational outcomes, hold the education budget steady, axe a bunch of "dead weight" teachers (and heck, support staff - they've grown as a % of students), and pay the remaining high-performing teachers / support staff significantly more than our neighbors so we attract the best.
Of course, figuring out who's "dead weight" and who is "the best" is no small feat either.
I'm wholly open to better ideas. I would like to posit, however, that we're chasing an intervening variable (teacher pay) when we really ought be most concerned with student outcomes (college readiness & workforce preparedness).
For me, better teacher pay is a means to an end (better educated students ready to deal with the challenges of our global economy, balanced by a civic mindedness to be contributors to their communities). If paying teachers more won't produce more and better prepared young adults, there's not much point in allocating those scarce resources.
Smaller class sizes? One of my kids went to school at Central HS in RC, they split and alternate school days because they can't fit them all in at the same time and her average class size was 31. It may be a bit different now with the new freshman wing but I doubt it made that much of a difference. Wonder what kind of smoke he is blowing?
Thanks Cory for calling it like it is in Mitchell under the superintendency of Joe Graves. For the first time in nearly 15 years a "new" school board member will be seated without the public knowing of the candidate. Nine year board member, Dana Price indicated he might run again, but was the very first signer of Cory Aadland's petition. This is his right. But for the first time in nearly 15 years the school business office did not notify The Daily Republic or either of the local radio stations that anyone had taken out petitions. Aadland got his petitions March 20th, the last business day in March and turned them in Monday, March 24th, 2014. No other petitions were mailed in by registered mail, so there will be no election. Doing it over the weekend allowed few chances for anyone to publically "spill the beans".
The voters under Graves' management were given no chance to know of the new candidate's views. Rick Johnson, a board member of Graves' preference elected in June 2013, had a stroke last year and has not attended a board meeting this year. He is a resident of Firesteel Nursing Home. Published board minutes simply report Rick Johnson absent.
Should Johnson resign, after July 1st, 2014 who would be the most " worthy" to take his place? Why I bet new Board Member Aadland would be first to name Dana price. So Graves would have his way until 2017 as per his contract.
With what some call Graves' " well browned nose", Mitchell Schools will operate much like Russia's Putin. With some 13 years of Graves' Administration how well do our schools teach and demonstrate the finer points of democracy: running for office, voting, informing the public or even listening to them.
Grave's made three attempts to get elected to the Legislature but dropped out each time. I think Graves was afraid to run against Rod Hall and have to tell the truth!
Here's the problem. The researchers Graves refers to are bureaucrats in the righty think tank culture, where they value bean counting over the reality of education or demographics. Neither of these researchers has much classroom experience. Only one has real K-12 classroom experience, that being two years teaching in high school. One came from a business background, and both seem to support privatizing education.
Both seem to be oriented to very urban districts, and don't understand that in much of South Dakota, increasing class sizes to the point that they suggest would mean mandated school closings in urban and, especially, in rural districts. In fact you would probably have to close 2 out of every 3 schools in rural areas to make the savings they envision from increased class size. That means elementary schools in two of every three small towns in South Dakota would be shuttered. While I would like to see consolidation of school districts, to me that's far different than this radical idea.
I wonder just who they are counting when they number teachers. Are they counting various title teachers? Reading only teachers? Art or music teachers? Counselors? Nurses? Those teachers don't necessarily have a classroom full of students. That would skew their numbers wrongly.
In the 70s any kind of specialist was a very rare thing. One teacher for one classroom. It was a pretty forthright accounting of a teacher/student ratio.
Who's doing the counting now? According to Don, it's people who have a specific result already in mind.
http://doe.sd.gov/ofm/statdigest.aspx
The SD Dept. of Ed counts "Certified Instructional Staff" and "Classroom Staff"
Mr. Pay may have a fair point with rural school size issues... though I also wonder what/if any shortages there might be due to rurality.
Why isn't the Daily Repulsive inquiring of the supt's office the status of elections? Poor journalism here. The media is suppose to be on top of this.
"Daily Repulsive"! Locals have such great nicknames for their local papers. I love it.
I see decent teacher pay as a moral obligation on the part of the people. We deserve a D at best right now on that score.
I would never consider working in Mitchell for the simple reason this man is the superintendent.
MJL if you are not Catholic you would not have much chance. When Rev. Joe Graves came to Mitchell he came as an ordained Catholic minister, a permanent deacon. The board, then was 4 protestants and 1 Catholic. Over the years since, Graves has recruited , campaigned for or supported 8 successful school board candidates in contested elections. 7 of the 8 elected board members are Catholic. The makeup of the board has been 4C 1 P or at least 3C 1P.
Of 10 or more principals named by Rev. Graves. Supt. I know of not one who isn't Catholic. Talk about separation of church and state!
Just goes to show that some folks consider teachers as baby sitters, and school a place to send the kids while I go to work.
The boards have been 4C 1P_ or 3C 2P not 3C 1P but majority rules.