Today I'm playing catch-up on my reading and I found a story on Philly.com which focused on New Jersey taxpayer complaints about school superintendent pay. According to the story, the average salary of a school district superintendent in New Jersey is approximately $155,000 and sixty school administrators earn in excess of $200,000. The data cited in the story makes no relationship between income and the size of the school district.
I don't take issue with the salaries. When compared with private sector executives who handle budgets of similar size--imagine a $150 to $200 million business and up--superintendents are underpaid. They cannot earn bonuses or stock options. A doctorate in education is also a job requirement. There are no academic requirements beyond a bachelor's degree, let alone a doctorate, for senior executives in most private businesses.
I understand the griping. They're getting paid with "our money." One cited in the story asked for a $25,000 raise in difficult times; quite possibly others have asked for a raise. And, if the voters didn't get a raise, neither should the public servants.
However, there are possible solutions:
+ Neighboring districts that are losing students can consolidate schools. The salary of a superintendent in a consolidated district would be set based on salaries of larger districts with comparable budgets.
+ The superintendent's salary could be tied to the salary of the business administrator of the town where he works. It makes little sense for the executive responsible for education to make more than the executive who is responsible for all of the other public services in a town such as police, fire and public works.
+ Place all of the non-academic functions of the school district under the business administrator for the town. The superintendent's responsibilities would be exclusively for education, which is his expertise. There is no reason for a school district to have its own finance, purchasing, custodial and security functions, to name three examples. Those can be managed by the local government.
Complaining about who makes what will not get New Jerseyans, as well as citizens in other states, better schools. Neither will attempts to force the status quo down the voters throats. Honest discussion of what a school system must do and what it wants to be is a far better start.
Thursday, May 27, 2010
Book Review: Theodore Boone, Kid Lawyer by John Grisham
Every once in a while I like to review a young adult book to get some idea of what middle school and high school students are reading outside of school. I've never tried to write for a young adult (YA) audience, but, judging by the shelf space at book stores, the category is exploding. The selection goes far beyond the summer reading tables. Stories of life in school are popular, so are tales of vampires and zombies.
Now, John Grisham has entered the YA category with his latest book, Theodore Boone, Kid Lawyer.
I like Grisham's books, so I bought this one, curious to learn how he his writing would be adapted to young adults. I felt he did an excellent job with developing his main character, Theodore (Theo) Boone, an eighth grade "law nerd" or "law geek." While other more geeks or nerds are represented in this story--computers, math and stock market players being examples, Theo lives for the law.
The only child of lawyer parents in a mid-sized town of Strattonberg, Theo sneaks out of school to watch court cases and provides basic legal advice to his fellow students. He knows more lawyers and judges than anyone in town, and he sends business their way. He even bails a dog out of animal court as a favor to a popular girl in school. He wants to jump from the eighth grade to law school by taking law classes online, though his parents want him to be a more "normal" eighth grader.
Not that Theo is not well-rounded. He likes baseball and plays golf with his father every week. He's considered slightly odd by his classmates, but he is reasonably well-liked. He maintains an A average in school, not slogging through the subjects he doesn't like. But he is different. I had friends with lawyer parents and I never knew any who wanted to spend time after-school at a law office as much as Theo does.
It is interesting that Grisham chose a suburban setting for this story, as opposed to a city where the courts have a more lively calendar. The lawyers Theo knows in town are "office lawyers," attorneys who rarely go to trial. His parents handle real estate transactions and divorces. His uncle, now disbarred, was a tax attorney. Theo, however, lives for the excitement of the court room which he knows only from television drama.
When a murder trial becomes local news, the event is a major education for him. Through a chain of believable events, Theo becomes involved in the case as well as follow-up investigation. Also believable, he does not try to use legal reasoning by himself. That was a blessing. Had this novel been about a kid who was smarter than experienced adult lawyers, I might have closed it before the finish.
If you have a son or daughter age 12 to 15 who is thinking about becoming a lawyer, this is an entertaining and worthwhile read. I doubt he or she will want to become like Theo, but there is education, plenty of suspense, as well as several believable and likable heroes in this story.
Prom Moms, You Know What I’m Talkin’ About-- -Guest Post by Ashley Olson Rosen
I never went to a high school prom, but lately I've made friends who actively prepare their daughters for the experience. I ask them questions, that, while seemingly dumb, have helped me appreciate the care and humor behind the pre-prom rituals.
My friend, Ashley Olson Rosen, wrote this piece in April. Ashley lives in Louisville, so I'd guess school ends earlier there than it does in New Jersey. The prom season that has passed elsewhere in the country is in full swing in the Garden State. So, with Ashley's permission, I'm sharing her column today. I strongly encourage readers to visit her blog, Funnier With Wine.
Prologue: Woman rings doorbell of old friends she hasn’t seen in awhile. Quick hugs are exchanged. “Lord, I need to tie one on,” classy woman says in way of greeting.
If you think it would be a crappy life to be a lady-in-waiting to British royalty, if you feel sorry for Ugly Betty or if you think that we were right in abolishing slavery, then you should never, ever be a PROM MOM. This job is not only high stress and low reward, it is also exhausting.
The season kicks off up to two months before the big event with The Great Dress Hunt.
For the record: I hate, hate, hate shopping. I only hate, hated it until The Great Dress Hunt. That’s when I added the third hate.
Fortunately for me, one of the first places we looked had some great dresses. Well, really, fortunately for my Prommer, because I was completely prepared to tell her that a Hefty trash bag — with the right accessories, of course — looked great, because I just wanted to check dress shopping off the list.
She tried on four — and all looked great. But one looked greater than the others and, even though it was considerably over budget, it was a dress she could wear as an adult, assuming there were no unfortunate heels stuck through the fabric or disgusting Southern Comfort vomiting episodes from someone walking close behind her.
And it was black. Classic color, easy to accessorize. Sold.
Oops. Then she texted one of her friends. The friend who had “called” black. Seriously? I said. You “called” colors? Did all 120 senior girls call different colors? Like did someone have Burnt Sienna? Goldenrod?
No you idiot, she said, obviously forgetting that I had the credit card. Just my group of four.
Well, what the hell color did you get and why did you just try on a forbidden color and do you know how freakin’ close it is to cocktail hour and here, hold my purse while I run shrieking out into the intersection.
Luckily, just about then she got a text giving special dispensation to wear the black dress and I had that sucker paid for and pinned for alterations before another close call leading to a tearful meltdown could occur.
The people who’d sold us the dress were very nice, although they were as startled by the “color-calling” technique as I was. Once she had stopped crying and we’d bought the dress, they told my daughter to call them if she was interested in maybe working there on a temporary basis — just for prom season.
When we got to the car, she said, Did they just offer me a job after I had a breakdown in their store? And I explained to her that they probably wanted to hire her so that SHE could handle the dramatic high schoolers while THEY sip bourbon and waters in the break room. No sane adult without guardianship wants to step into the path of a Prommer.
But there I remained, right in the path of the storm.
In the ensuing weeks, we embarked on the Futile Prom Lingerie Hunt, searching boxes and racks at innumerable stores for undergarments that don’t show under a prom gown. If you have an up-and-coming Prommer, take my advice and save your money. There is NO SUCH THING. I have to recommend the duct tape.
We did find some sort of things that you were supposed to glue, apparently permanently, onto your child’s sensitive skin. For like $30. Fine. We’ll worry about the skin later.
Friday afternoon I sat with her while she had a manicure and a pedicure, and I know that doesn’t sound horrifying to you but I have a SERIOUS phobia of nail salons. It is torture for me. I hate the smell, I can’t understand anybody, I never know who to tip when, it’s just WAY out of my comfort zone. (See http://ashleyolsonrosen.wordpress.com/2009/09/30/proper-pediquette-pedicure-etiquette-eludes-me/) I mean, I really hate it. But we got that done on Friday, so Saturday was sure to be a breeze.
But Prom Day dawned dark, dreary and prone to downpours. Ohhhhhh noooooo! Mr. Bill would have thrown HIMSELF in front of a steamroller if he’d been me that day.
As the best hairdresser in town, Susan Borders, did her hair, my Prommer watched the rain pour down.
Why does it have to rain on MY prom day? she lamented, a valid lament.
Well, it poured all day on my wedding day, if it makes you feel any better, I said. And I had an outdoor wedding.
She considered that for a minute and I thought, well, good, she sees that this isn’t an insurmountable problem. I’ve helped. I’m not the worst mother in the world. Hmph.
Did it ever occur to you that not everything is about you?
OK, so apparently the whole “you’re-not-the-only-chick-who-ever-got-rained-on thing” wasn’t gonna work. But her hair was done and had enough hairspray, shellac and lingerie glue on it that if Wylie Coyote dropped an anvil on her head, she’d be smooshed like an accordion but her hair would stay in a perfect bun and skitter off down the mountain path, intact.
Still, when we got to the mall for our makeup appointment, I dropped her at the door with my only umbrella and then ran from the VERY farthest parking space in the whole lot with a Kroger bag over my head. My jeans were soaked halfway up my calf and I tripped over the curb because, as you may know, Kroger bags don’t have eyeholes.
A bunch of her friends were at Bobbi Brown too, and the girls all looked amazing, at least from the neck up. I couldn’t help but reminisce about my own prom, where I wore a heinous dress — now that I think of it, it was Burnt Sienna — and had curling iron burns in my hair and I think instead of making either my eyes POP or my lips POP, I elected to emphasize the Revlon cover stick work, where it was slathered, two shades lighter than the rest of my skin, over multiple blemishes. How’s that for POP, baby?
Some of the other moms were there too, and we all exchanged Prom Mom looks. I know I looked like I was about to cry. It’s because I was about to cry.
When we got home, we had to do a quick turnaround to get her to a friend’s house. This was about when we found that the lingerie glue must have meant business, because when we were already late for pictures we discovered that the applicator was securely glued into the glue and it wasn’t going to budge. As I knelt at her feet like a loyal subject, putting her shoes on (shut up, my friend Jill actually washed her daughter’s hair so as not to mess up fingernails!) I worried that the frustration over the lingerie would lead to a swift kick to my midsection. But she didn’t, thank God, because I am getting older by the day and frailty is just a step away.
Twenty minutes late to pictures. Excellent. Oh, and of course, stupid Prom Mom forgot the boutonniere we’d bought, a lovely bloom that spent prom night staying crisp and fragrant in our LG refrigerator. But another Prom Mom came to my pathetic rescue and saved me from an “off with her head!” by somehow having an extra boutonniere in her car! Oh happy day!
We practically shoved them into their limo, but not before suffering one last humiliation. Some of the other parents convinced me to get in a picture with Prommer. There she was — perfectly tanned, manicured, coiffed, made up and … most important, perfectly SEVENTEEN … and there I was, the Prom Mom — haggard, stressed, old and in DIRE need of drink. I was smiling, but it was only because I was thinking about the wine waiting at my friend Heather’s house.
Looking back on it, it wasn’t that bad. She had a great time and everyone made it home safely. And I didn’t even have to go along to taste her dinner for poison.
My friend, Ashley Olson Rosen, wrote this piece in April. Ashley lives in Louisville, so I'd guess school ends earlier there than it does in New Jersey. The prom season that has passed elsewhere in the country is in full swing in the Garden State. So, with Ashley's permission, I'm sharing her column today. I strongly encourage readers to visit her blog, Funnier With Wine.
Prologue: Woman rings doorbell of old friends she hasn’t seen in awhile. Quick hugs are exchanged. “Lord, I need to tie one on,” classy woman says in way of greeting.
If you think it would be a crappy life to be a lady-in-waiting to British royalty, if you feel sorry for Ugly Betty or if you think that we were right in abolishing slavery, then you should never, ever be a PROM MOM. This job is not only high stress and low reward, it is also exhausting.
The season kicks off up to two months before the big event with The Great Dress Hunt.
For the record: I hate, hate, hate shopping. I only hate, hated it until The Great Dress Hunt. That’s when I added the third hate.
Fortunately for me, one of the first places we looked had some great dresses. Well, really, fortunately for my Prommer, because I was completely prepared to tell her that a Hefty trash bag — with the right accessories, of course — looked great, because I just wanted to check dress shopping off the list.
She tried on four — and all looked great. But one looked greater than the others and, even though it was considerably over budget, it was a dress she could wear as an adult, assuming there were no unfortunate heels stuck through the fabric or disgusting Southern Comfort vomiting episodes from someone walking close behind her.
And it was black. Classic color, easy to accessorize. Sold.
Oops. Then she texted one of her friends. The friend who had “called” black. Seriously? I said. You “called” colors? Did all 120 senior girls call different colors? Like did someone have Burnt Sienna? Goldenrod?
No you idiot, she said, obviously forgetting that I had the credit card. Just my group of four.
Well, what the hell color did you get and why did you just try on a forbidden color and do you know how freakin’ close it is to cocktail hour and here, hold my purse while I run shrieking out into the intersection.
Luckily, just about then she got a text giving special dispensation to wear the black dress and I had that sucker paid for and pinned for alterations before another close call leading to a tearful meltdown could occur.
The people who’d sold us the dress were very nice, although they were as startled by the “color-calling” technique as I was. Once she had stopped crying and we’d bought the dress, they told my daughter to call them if she was interested in maybe working there on a temporary basis — just for prom season.
When we got to the car, she said, Did they just offer me a job after I had a breakdown in their store? And I explained to her that they probably wanted to hire her so that SHE could handle the dramatic high schoolers while THEY sip bourbon and waters in the break room. No sane adult without guardianship wants to step into the path of a Prommer.
But there I remained, right in the path of the storm.
In the ensuing weeks, we embarked on the Futile Prom Lingerie Hunt, searching boxes and racks at innumerable stores for undergarments that don’t show under a prom gown. If you have an up-and-coming Prommer, take my advice and save your money. There is NO SUCH THING. I have to recommend the duct tape.
We did find some sort of things that you were supposed to glue, apparently permanently, onto your child’s sensitive skin. For like $30. Fine. We’ll worry about the skin later.
Friday afternoon I sat with her while she had a manicure and a pedicure, and I know that doesn’t sound horrifying to you but I have a SERIOUS phobia of nail salons. It is torture for me. I hate the smell, I can’t understand anybody, I never know who to tip when, it’s just WAY out of my comfort zone. (See http://ashleyolsonrosen.wordpress.com/2009/09/30/proper-pediquette-pedicure-etiquette-eludes-me/) I mean, I really hate it. But we got that done on Friday, so Saturday was sure to be a breeze.
But Prom Day dawned dark, dreary and prone to downpours. Ohhhhhh noooooo! Mr. Bill would have thrown HIMSELF in front of a steamroller if he’d been me that day.
As the best hairdresser in town, Susan Borders, did her hair, my Prommer watched the rain pour down.
Why does it have to rain on MY prom day? she lamented, a valid lament.
Well, it poured all day on my wedding day, if it makes you feel any better, I said. And I had an outdoor wedding.
She considered that for a minute and I thought, well, good, she sees that this isn’t an insurmountable problem. I’ve helped. I’m not the worst mother in the world. Hmph.
Did it ever occur to you that not everything is about you?
OK, so apparently the whole “you’re-not-the-only-chick-who-ever-got-rained-on thing” wasn’t gonna work. But her hair was done and had enough hairspray, shellac and lingerie glue on it that if Wylie Coyote dropped an anvil on her head, she’d be smooshed like an accordion but her hair would stay in a perfect bun and skitter off down the mountain path, intact.
Still, when we got to the mall for our makeup appointment, I dropped her at the door with my only umbrella and then ran from the VERY farthest parking space in the whole lot with a Kroger bag over my head. My jeans were soaked halfway up my calf and I tripped over the curb because, as you may know, Kroger bags don’t have eyeholes.
A bunch of her friends were at Bobbi Brown too, and the girls all looked amazing, at least from the neck up. I couldn’t help but reminisce about my own prom, where I wore a heinous dress — now that I think of it, it was Burnt Sienna — and had curling iron burns in my hair and I think instead of making either my eyes POP or my lips POP, I elected to emphasize the Revlon cover stick work, where it was slathered, two shades lighter than the rest of my skin, over multiple blemishes. How’s that for POP, baby?
Some of the other moms were there too, and we all exchanged Prom Mom looks. I know I looked like I was about to cry. It’s because I was about to cry.
When we got home, we had to do a quick turnaround to get her to a friend’s house. This was about when we found that the lingerie glue must have meant business, because when we were already late for pictures we discovered that the applicator was securely glued into the glue and it wasn’t going to budge. As I knelt at her feet like a loyal subject, putting her shoes on (shut up, my friend Jill actually washed her daughter’s hair so as not to mess up fingernails!) I worried that the frustration over the lingerie would lead to a swift kick to my midsection. But she didn’t, thank God, because I am getting older by the day and frailty is just a step away.
Twenty minutes late to pictures. Excellent. Oh, and of course, stupid Prom Mom forgot the boutonniere we’d bought, a lovely bloom that spent prom night staying crisp and fragrant in our LG refrigerator. But another Prom Mom came to my pathetic rescue and saved me from an “off with her head!” by somehow having an extra boutonniere in her car! Oh happy day!
We practically shoved them into their limo, but not before suffering one last humiliation. Some of the other parents convinced me to get in a picture with Prommer. There she was — perfectly tanned, manicured, coiffed, made up and … most important, perfectly SEVENTEEN … and there I was, the Prom Mom — haggard, stressed, old and in DIRE need of drink. I was smiling, but it was only because I was thinking about the wine waiting at my friend Heather’s house.
Looking back on it, it wasn’t that bad. She had a great time and everyone made it home safely. And I didn’t even have to go along to taste her dinner for poison.
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
If Not the Big 10/11, Then Why Not the ACC for Rutgers?
There has been much speculation that Rutgers will be one of three or five universities that will be invited to join the Big 10/11. I've added to the comments here, too. But what if the 10/11 decides not to expand or invite only the one institution they have coveted for years: Notre Dame?
Inviting only Notre Dame makes sense to the 10/11. They've wanted the school before. At least five 10/11 teams play the Irish in football every year, and the rest would love to have them on their schedule. Aside from Northwestern, which is already in the 10/11, Notre Dame is the best private university in the Midwest that plays major college football.
Stepping away from football, Notre Dame's sports teams play in the Big East for these reasons.
First, they need to have a set of teams they can schedule twice a season for home and away dates. This is much easier when you play in a conference.
Second, the Big East basketball schedule gives the Irish national exposure in the New York, Philadelphia, Chicago and Washington D.C. markets, among others. That helps visibility and recruiting.
Third, the Big East basketball schedule gives the Irish an opportunity to play religiously affiliated schools: DePaul, Georgetown, Marquette, Providence, St. John's and Villanova, that have also been national basketball powers.
Fourth, they play other basketball powers twice a season: U-Conn,Louisville, Pitt, Syracuse and West Virginia.
Joining the 10/11 could actually hurt Notre Dame in basketball, assuming the Irish would be the only team invited through expansion.
But where would this leave Rutgers?
To continue in the Big East? Long term, no. There is no way a conference with only eight football teams will earn an opportunity to play in a national championship game. This past season, Cincinnati ran the table only to be relegated to a lower-level game. Why would the situation be different for another Big East that enjoys similar success?
To join the Atlantic Coast Conference (ACC)? Maybe, if the ACC wishes to go from 12 to 14 or 16 teams. Though there would be competition. Syracuse has been invited to join the ACC before. But would Syracuse be one of only two schools invited to join with Rutgers? My guess is that Pitt and U-Conn would be invited, too. The ACC would want them for basketball.
Of course, I am presuming that the ACC would want Rutgers for much the same reasons as the 10/11: academic quality and access to a huge media market. In addition to football, Rutgers womens basketball adds quality, though the Carolina, Duke, Maryland and Virginia programs are excellent, with Florida State up and coming as well. The men would keep other division rivals out of the basement. For now.
The academic comparisons for Rutgers are little different between the ACC and the 10/11. Seven current and potential ACC schools: Duke, Maryland, Georgia Tech, North Carolina, Pitt, Syracuse and Virginia are members of the Association of American Universities. Boston College, Clemson, Wake Forest and Miami rank ahead of Rutgers in U.S. News and World Report.
An ACC North in a 16 team conference could include Boston College, U-Conn, Maryland, Pitt, Rutgers, Syracuse, Virginia and Virginia Tech. The more southern schools would form the ACC South.
Over the course of a football season, each team would play their seven division opponents, three teams in the other division and two non-conference games.
This would have the makings of true regional rivalries; the ACC would be the only national conference with bi-regional title games in football and basketball. Home field advantages could be rotated every season to make things interesting.
I don't know if the ACC is considering expansion; much of the speculation has surrounded the 10/11. But if the 10/11 takes Texas, Nebraska, Missouri and Notre Dame and one other school, which I believe would be Texas A&M, then realignments will happen all over the country.
It would be only natural for the ACC, PAC-10 and SEC to follow suit and go to 16 teams. Four or five conferences of 16 teams--the fifth a blend of Big 12 and western schools--would make it easier to have a meaningful round of playoffs.
I would love to see Rutgers in the 10/11. But an invitation to join the ACC would be a win as well.
Inviting only Notre Dame makes sense to the 10/11. They've wanted the school before. At least five 10/11 teams play the Irish in football every year, and the rest would love to have them on their schedule. Aside from Northwestern, which is already in the 10/11, Notre Dame is the best private university in the Midwest that plays major college football.
Stepping away from football, Notre Dame's sports teams play in the Big East for these reasons.
First, they need to have a set of teams they can schedule twice a season for home and away dates. This is much easier when you play in a conference.
Second, the Big East basketball schedule gives the Irish national exposure in the New York, Philadelphia, Chicago and Washington D.C. markets, among others. That helps visibility and recruiting.
Third, the Big East basketball schedule gives the Irish an opportunity to play religiously affiliated schools: DePaul, Georgetown, Marquette, Providence, St. John's and Villanova, that have also been national basketball powers.
Fourth, they play other basketball powers twice a season: U-Conn,Louisville, Pitt, Syracuse and West Virginia.
Joining the 10/11 could actually hurt Notre Dame in basketball, assuming the Irish would be the only team invited through expansion.
But where would this leave Rutgers?
To continue in the Big East? Long term, no. There is no way a conference with only eight football teams will earn an opportunity to play in a national championship game. This past season, Cincinnati ran the table only to be relegated to a lower-level game. Why would the situation be different for another Big East that enjoys similar success?
To join the Atlantic Coast Conference (ACC)? Maybe, if the ACC wishes to go from 12 to 14 or 16 teams. Though there would be competition. Syracuse has been invited to join the ACC before. But would Syracuse be one of only two schools invited to join with Rutgers? My guess is that Pitt and U-Conn would be invited, too. The ACC would want them for basketball.
Of course, I am presuming that the ACC would want Rutgers for much the same reasons as the 10/11: academic quality and access to a huge media market. In addition to football, Rutgers womens basketball adds quality, though the Carolina, Duke, Maryland and Virginia programs are excellent, with Florida State up and coming as well. The men would keep other division rivals out of the basement. For now.
The academic comparisons for Rutgers are little different between the ACC and the 10/11. Seven current and potential ACC schools: Duke, Maryland, Georgia Tech, North Carolina, Pitt, Syracuse and Virginia are members of the Association of American Universities. Boston College, Clemson, Wake Forest and Miami rank ahead of Rutgers in U.S. News and World Report.
An ACC North in a 16 team conference could include Boston College, U-Conn, Maryland, Pitt, Rutgers, Syracuse, Virginia and Virginia Tech. The more southern schools would form the ACC South.
Over the course of a football season, each team would play their seven division opponents, three teams in the other division and two non-conference games.
This would have the makings of true regional rivalries; the ACC would be the only national conference with bi-regional title games in football and basketball. Home field advantages could be rotated every season to make things interesting.
I don't know if the ACC is considering expansion; much of the speculation has surrounded the 10/11. But if the 10/11 takes Texas, Nebraska, Missouri and Notre Dame and one other school, which I believe would be Texas A&M, then realignments will happen all over the country.
It would be only natural for the ACC, PAC-10 and SEC to follow suit and go to 16 teams. Four or five conferences of 16 teams--the fifth a blend of Big 12 and western schools--would make it easier to have a meaningful round of playoffs.
I would love to see Rutgers in the 10/11. But an invitation to join the ACC would be a win as well.
Monday, May 24, 2010
Mass Protests Leave New Jersey Budget Crisis at Ground Zero
This weekend there was another example of democracy in action in my home state of New Jersey. Between 30,000 and 35,000 people came into downtown Trenton, our state capital to protest Governor Chris Christie's budget cuts.
The protests were not led by Democratic politicians, but by the leadership of the public employee unions that are most affected by the cuts.
I've read three news stories about the protest this morning and the comments from Democratic Party leaders stand out. Steve Sweeney (D-Gloucester County) said that the protest made the unions an easier target for the governor.
Shiela Oliver (D-Essex County) said that: many more Democratic legislators would have attended if they had been invited. Oliver said her absence is not a sign that she "devalues" support of teachers or other public employees.
Needless to say, the stories made it easy for me to wonder if the unions were really in Democratic hands. Were they now just a very large interest group that could be placated by either party, or are they self-interested, indebted to no party? If the latter is true, then the protest was the absolute last action the union leaders should have taken.
This week, New Jerseyans learned that the state's revenues were approximately $550 million less than expected. There were also estimates that continuance of the "millionaire's tax," a tax on income over $400,000 would close $400 million of the revenue gap.
I didn't major in finance in business school, but I know two things: state governments cannot run deficits and when millionaires cannot close the gap, bright people need to find other ways to do it, besides raising income taxes. As far as balancing a budget and determining necessary services, New Jersey is at Ground Zero.
Governor Christie has vetoed continuance of the millionaire's tax. That was a mistake. We're all responsible for closing the gap, even the millionaires. I sincerely doubt that many will move away; their jobs or their business interests are here. Billionaires like Donald Trump live in New York City and entertainers live in Southern California, places that tax them at higher rates than New Jersey. I don't envision The Donald packing up and moving to Texas any day.
Christie made a mistake, but he won the week in the media. The Democratic bill tied the continuance of the tax to restoration of funding for senior citizens programs. Christie then went to the media and said he found more money for senior citizens. Therefore, no need for the continuance. Then he found out revenues would be $550 million short. Back to Ground Zero.
Here's what I believe thoughtful Democrats and Republicans need to do for 2011.
+ Continue the millionaires tax. There's a deficit and it's doubtful the governor's team will find enough cuts to close it. It's more doubtful that he will get a budget with more draconian cuts than the ones he had previously proposed.
+ Consider these essential services off the table: emergency services, public safety, debt service on bonds secured by the state, the state court system and the public employee retirement plan. But all salaries and the benefit increases would be frozen for 2011. A hiring freeze would be put in place.
+ Any service that does not use state funds, but disburses federal or foundation monies could be continued. However, staff salaries funded by state government or a state-chartered entity (for example, Rutgers) are frozen. A hiring freeze would be put in place.
+ Any service that relies on user-fees: colleges, public transportation being two prime examples is going to lose some subsidy. All salaries would be frozen and there would be a hiring freeze for 2011.
+ Communities that have an average per-capita income or average household income higher than the average of New York City to the north or Philadelphia to the south receive no municipal aid in 2011.
+ Teachers earning over $75,000 in 2010 accept a pay freeze.
+ The governor takes his property tax cap legislation and his public employee wage cap legislation off the table. He challenges counties and municipalities to be creative. This is more of a populist approach than forcing the policy of a cap.
+ The governor authorizes an audit by the state's Inspector General for every agency that is not constitutionally required or cannot raise user's fees to help balance its budget.
+ As the economy improves, the governor authorizes an audit of every agency that charges user fees to maintain control over the fee structure. The state must know how much money is needed to run such agencies when business is brisk so that fees are not ridiculously excessive.
This is a short list of ideas. They don't sound sexy, Bright people on both sides will find more. Those will not be sexy either. But it takes a bunch of good ideas to take a state from Ground Zero, sexy or not.
The protests were not led by Democratic politicians, but by the leadership of the public employee unions that are most affected by the cuts.
I've read three news stories about the protest this morning and the comments from Democratic Party leaders stand out. Steve Sweeney (D-Gloucester County) said that the protest made the unions an easier target for the governor.
Shiela Oliver (D-Essex County) said that: many more Democratic legislators would have attended if they had been invited. Oliver said her absence is not a sign that she "devalues" support of teachers or other public employees.
Needless to say, the stories made it easy for me to wonder if the unions were really in Democratic hands. Were they now just a very large interest group that could be placated by either party, or are they self-interested, indebted to no party? If the latter is true, then the protest was the absolute last action the union leaders should have taken.
This week, New Jerseyans learned that the state's revenues were approximately $550 million less than expected. There were also estimates that continuance of the "millionaire's tax," a tax on income over $400,000 would close $400 million of the revenue gap.
I didn't major in finance in business school, but I know two things: state governments cannot run deficits and when millionaires cannot close the gap, bright people need to find other ways to do it, besides raising income taxes. As far as balancing a budget and determining necessary services, New Jersey is at Ground Zero.
Governor Christie has vetoed continuance of the millionaire's tax. That was a mistake. We're all responsible for closing the gap, even the millionaires. I sincerely doubt that many will move away; their jobs or their business interests are here. Billionaires like Donald Trump live in New York City and entertainers live in Southern California, places that tax them at higher rates than New Jersey. I don't envision The Donald packing up and moving to Texas any day.
Christie made a mistake, but he won the week in the media. The Democratic bill tied the continuance of the tax to restoration of funding for senior citizens programs. Christie then went to the media and said he found more money for senior citizens. Therefore, no need for the continuance. Then he found out revenues would be $550 million short. Back to Ground Zero.
Here's what I believe thoughtful Democrats and Republicans need to do for 2011.
+ Continue the millionaires tax. There's a deficit and it's doubtful the governor's team will find enough cuts to close it. It's more doubtful that he will get a budget with more draconian cuts than the ones he had previously proposed.
+ Consider these essential services off the table: emergency services, public safety, debt service on bonds secured by the state, the state court system and the public employee retirement plan. But all salaries and the benefit increases would be frozen for 2011. A hiring freeze would be put in place.
+ Any service that does not use state funds, but disburses federal or foundation monies could be continued. However, staff salaries funded by state government or a state-chartered entity (for example, Rutgers) are frozen. A hiring freeze would be put in place.
+ Any service that relies on user-fees: colleges, public transportation being two prime examples is going to lose some subsidy. All salaries would be frozen and there would be a hiring freeze for 2011.
+ Communities that have an average per-capita income or average household income higher than the average of New York City to the north or Philadelphia to the south receive no municipal aid in 2011.
+ Teachers earning over $75,000 in 2010 accept a pay freeze.
+ The governor takes his property tax cap legislation and his public employee wage cap legislation off the table. He challenges counties and municipalities to be creative. This is more of a populist approach than forcing the policy of a cap.
+ The governor authorizes an audit by the state's Inspector General for every agency that is not constitutionally required or cannot raise user's fees to help balance its budget.
+ As the economy improves, the governor authorizes an audit of every agency that charges user fees to maintain control over the fee structure. The state must know how much money is needed to run such agencies when business is brisk so that fees are not ridiculously excessive.
This is a short list of ideas. They don't sound sexy, Bright people on both sides will find more. Those will not be sexy either. But it takes a bunch of good ideas to take a state from Ground Zero, sexy or not.
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Rutgers and the Big 10/11--Perfect Together?
This post was a no-brainer, at least for this Rutgers alum. This morning, I'm reading a story on Fox Sports that will tell you why Rutgers would be a good fit for the Big 10/11, at least from the football side.
Would I like to see the Scarlet Knights move to the 10/11? I've said this before: Heck yes! More money. Better television coverage. Guaranteed match-ups with academically prestigious schools every season. A shot at the Rose Bowl. What Rutgers football fan, especially a season ticket holder, wouldn't want that?
Then there is the "feel good" aspect of beating a perennial power like Ohio State or Penn State in your house. I know that well. I saw Illinois, a grad school alma mater, knock off Michigan and Ohio State at home in '83 on route to a Rose Bowl season. I walked the field after the Michigan game. There are few things like looking up into the stands and cheering with fans you don't know after such a win.
Twenty three years later, I was at Rutgers Stadium when the Scarlet Knights upset then #2 Louisville. A year later, they beat then #2 South Florida. Both games sold out. Those were Thursday night games, too. The only games on ESPN those evenings. Students had classes. Alumni fought rush-hour traffic to get to the stadium.
Imagine a winning team, Saturday afternoon and Ohio State running onto the field. There will be motor homes in the parking lot. New Jersey is a state that is always mocked. I know that many Garden Staters would love to see Rutgers trounce any 10/11 team; recent success has brought us many subway alumni. Just like Notre Dame.
Believe me, Rutgers fans will turn out when there is a chance the Knights will win a meaningful game. I've read all the comments that pro football dominates New Jersey sports TV after baseball season is over.
How often is a Rutgers game placed opposite a Giants game, a Jets game, or even an Eagles game for the South Jersey fans? Do you think Miami stations put Hurricanes games on against Dolphin games or that Pittsburgh stations put the Pitt Panthers on TV opposite the Steelers? Let's believe that the networks will show some common sense when choosing the game of the week.
But will Rutgers fans make winter trips to Madison or Minneapolis? Why not? The university has nearly 400,000 living alumni. I can't imagine the flight being more expensive than a trip to South Florida. It's cold in the Midwest? Rutgers fans are used to sitting in a cold stadium in December. That won't stop fans from flying to a cold weather city, unless the team is having an exceptionally poor season.
Obviously, many other questions must be answered before Rutgers, if invited, can make such a move. It would cost the university $5 million to leave the Big East, assuming the Big East can still function as a sports conference. If Notre Dame, Pitt or Syracuse joins Rutgers in the 10/11 then the Big East is history.
Would I like to see the Scarlet Knights move to the 10/11? I've said this before: Heck yes! More money. Better television coverage. Guaranteed match-ups with academically prestigious schools every season. A shot at the Rose Bowl. What Rutgers football fan, especially a season ticket holder, wouldn't want that?
Then there is the "feel good" aspect of beating a perennial power like Ohio State or Penn State in your house. I know that well. I saw Illinois, a grad school alma mater, knock off Michigan and Ohio State at home in '83 on route to a Rose Bowl season. I walked the field after the Michigan game. There are few things like looking up into the stands and cheering with fans you don't know after such a win.
Twenty three years later, I was at Rutgers Stadium when the Scarlet Knights upset then #2 Louisville. A year later, they beat then #2 South Florida. Both games sold out. Those were Thursday night games, too. The only games on ESPN those evenings. Students had classes. Alumni fought rush-hour traffic to get to the stadium.
Imagine a winning team, Saturday afternoon and Ohio State running onto the field. There will be motor homes in the parking lot. New Jersey is a state that is always mocked. I know that many Garden Staters would love to see Rutgers trounce any 10/11 team; recent success has brought us many subway alumni. Just like Notre Dame.
Believe me, Rutgers fans will turn out when there is a chance the Knights will win a meaningful game. I've read all the comments that pro football dominates New Jersey sports TV after baseball season is over.
How often is a Rutgers game placed opposite a Giants game, a Jets game, or even an Eagles game for the South Jersey fans? Do you think Miami stations put Hurricanes games on against Dolphin games or that Pittsburgh stations put the Pitt Panthers on TV opposite the Steelers? Let's believe that the networks will show some common sense when choosing the game of the week.
But will Rutgers fans make winter trips to Madison or Minneapolis? Why not? The university has nearly 400,000 living alumni. I can't imagine the flight being more expensive than a trip to South Florida. It's cold in the Midwest? Rutgers fans are used to sitting in a cold stadium in December. That won't stop fans from flying to a cold weather city, unless the team is having an exceptionally poor season.
Obviously, many other questions must be answered before Rutgers, if invited, can make such a move. It would cost the university $5 million to leave the Big East, assuming the Big East can still function as a sports conference. If Notre Dame, Pitt or Syracuse joins Rutgers in the 10/11 then the Big East is history.
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
Texas Course Posting Law: Consumer Protection or Political Interference?
This week, the Chronicle of Higher Education has a story about a new law in Texas requiring university professors to post online specific information about their courses, classroom assignments, resumes, department budgets and student evaluations. Course information includes the syllabus, required reading, grading policy, assignments and examinations. All of this information must be no more than three clicks from the college home page.
At first, this seems innocent. The "three-click" policy appears to be the toughest condition; it will mean that the schools will need to invest in Web site redesign. The jump go like this:
Home Page-->Academics-->Majors--->Faculty or Courses as options
Sounds simple, but maybe silly, too. Students are more likely to go to internal campus portals, not the college site.
That's not the only silliness. If you went to college, you probably took several introductory courses such as calculus or chemistry that had a standard textbook over two semesters. The textbook has chapters; some are covered in the first semester, some in the second. Easy to tell what course content is likely to be. But that's no indicator of the quality of the book.
No matter. The introductory course is a required course. Professor evaluations matter little for these classes at a large school. Graduate assistants do more of the one-to-one teaching. Their evaluations might not matter as they move on more frequently than the faculty.
Besides, this is Texas we're reading about. Is there any chance students will have say over textbooks?
This law has little value for pre-professional classes beyond the introductory course. Suppose you want to be an accountant. Most states require at least 24 hours of accounting credits to qualify to sit for the CPA exam. How many people teach these courses at a college? Not many. The content is set to help students get jobs and pass the exam.
Professor evaluations mean little here, too. Either you slog through the course with the bad professor, if he's the only faculty member teaching that semester. Or you find a way to earn the credits at another college.
Now we're getting to the political interference issue: advanced liberal arts courses. Suppose you have faculty of unpopular political leanings. Their views are leftist in a right wing climate or conservative in a left wing one. Their choice of readings is out in the open for all students, and others, to see.
Students have a choice when they see the posted information: sign up for the class or pass, take something else. If they believe that they will be indoctrinated into an opposite point of view they can choose another course. Or they can ask the university to balance viewpoints. No harm there.
However, when I read that conservative groups, in this case the Young Conservatives of Texas and the Texas Public Policy Foundation, both backers of this law, I see potential for misuse.
Namely, conservative activists will use posted information against faculty members of liberal views and demand their dismissal. This is a violation of academic freedom and freedom of speech. It also denies students access to courses they might want to take, because of the professor.
One conservative activist, David Horowitz, has edited two books listing "radical" professors, teachers who teach their subjects, again mainly in the liberal arts, in views that he believes to be unpatriotic or un-American. It's his right, and the right of anyone else, to write books, but it is no one's right to disrupt a faculty member's classes or demand their termination because he does not like their political views.
I see hints of McCarthyism in this law. It definitely supports the intentions of conservatives who wish to remove non-tenured professors who do not share their views. These people have the ear of a conservative governor who might put the power of his office behind faculty terminations. That's an example of "big government" most Americans would not support.
Any conservative who has studied history and politics should be warned. Power is likely to shift the other way. The policies that you make for you may also be used against you.
At first, this seems innocent. The "three-click" policy appears to be the toughest condition; it will mean that the schools will need to invest in Web site redesign. The jump go like this:
Home Page-->Academics-->Majors--->Faculty or Courses as options
Sounds simple, but maybe silly, too. Students are more likely to go to internal campus portals, not the college site.
That's not the only silliness. If you went to college, you probably took several introductory courses such as calculus or chemistry that had a standard textbook over two semesters. The textbook has chapters; some are covered in the first semester, some in the second. Easy to tell what course content is likely to be. But that's no indicator of the quality of the book.
No matter. The introductory course is a required course. Professor evaluations matter little for these classes at a large school. Graduate assistants do more of the one-to-one teaching. Their evaluations might not matter as they move on more frequently than the faculty.
Besides, this is Texas we're reading about. Is there any chance students will have say over textbooks?
This law has little value for pre-professional classes beyond the introductory course. Suppose you want to be an accountant. Most states require at least 24 hours of accounting credits to qualify to sit for the CPA exam. How many people teach these courses at a college? Not many. The content is set to help students get jobs and pass the exam.
Professor evaluations mean little here, too. Either you slog through the course with the bad professor, if he's the only faculty member teaching that semester. Or you find a way to earn the credits at another college.
Now we're getting to the political interference issue: advanced liberal arts courses. Suppose you have faculty of unpopular political leanings. Their views are leftist in a right wing climate or conservative in a left wing one. Their choice of readings is out in the open for all students, and others, to see.
Students have a choice when they see the posted information: sign up for the class or pass, take something else. If they believe that they will be indoctrinated into an opposite point of view they can choose another course. Or they can ask the university to balance viewpoints. No harm there.
However, when I read that conservative groups, in this case the Young Conservatives of Texas and the Texas Public Policy Foundation, both backers of this law, I see potential for misuse.
Namely, conservative activists will use posted information against faculty members of liberal views and demand their dismissal. This is a violation of academic freedom and freedom of speech. It also denies students access to courses they might want to take, because of the professor.
One conservative activist, David Horowitz, has edited two books listing "radical" professors, teachers who teach their subjects, again mainly in the liberal arts, in views that he believes to be unpatriotic or un-American. It's his right, and the right of anyone else, to write books, but it is no one's right to disrupt a faculty member's classes or demand their termination because he does not like their political views.
I see hints of McCarthyism in this law. It definitely supports the intentions of conservatives who wish to remove non-tenured professors who do not share their views. These people have the ear of a conservative governor who might put the power of his office behind faculty terminations. That's an example of "big government" most Americans would not support.
Any conservative who has studied history and politics should be warned. Power is likely to shift the other way. The policies that you make for you may also be used against you.
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
What Is A Good Teacher?
I just finished The Rehearsal, a new novel that I'll be reviewing this week. Two lines in the story stood out, hence today's post.
A good teacher is somebody who awakes in you something that did not exist before. A good teacher changes you in a way that means you cannot go back even if you want to.
I'd say that's as good a definition of a good teacher as anyone could think of, and the author, Eleanor Catton, is still a student. Remarkable.
I read many arguments and comments about "good" teachers and "quality" teachers as well as "bad" teachers and that teachers should be evaluated much like other private sector workers.
But, if I follow that definition above, how can I, if I was a principal or school board member, know if I can get that kind of performance out of every teacher?
In the private sector, managers sit down with employees and review group and personal goals for the next quarter or fiscal year. Some goals are quantifiable--sales, cost savings being the best examples--and some are not. But employer and employee know the goals. Assuming the employer is performing satisfactorily and the employee is, too, the employee has some idea about his raise.
This process is much harder to do with teachers. For one thing, they usually don't "manage" the same people every year. They would need to know something about the students in each class before the start of the school, so that they can set goals for each student, as opposed to a full class. Some students may be on grade level in reading and math, others may be advanced, others may be behind.
If a principal knows his teachers, he will know who works best with the students who are behind in grade level, who can keep the average student's interests, and who can expand upon the abilities of the most gifted. At least I'd hope so.
Different students have different goals. A good teacher for one group of students will not be a good teacher for a totally different group. The smart principals and assistant principals would match classes to teacher talents--if they had the evidence to do it.
In an ideal situation, a teacher would read and know the prior test scores and evaluations of her incoming classes before the start of the school year. She would set goals around the individual students--some will need more attention than others--as well as the lesson plans for the full class.
Some students will not be on grade level before the start of the school year. They will need more tutoring, possibly after hours. Bringing them to grade level would be a major achievement, even if they did not pass a state-developed test. The better students will need some form of extra credit to keep them interested. Keeping their attention within a classroom of mixed abilities would be a major achievement, too.
This is why I don't believe in evaluating teachers, especially elementary school teachers, by results on state-developed standardized tests.
Evaluations based on test results help teachers who teach the average student. But a 100 percent "pass" rate, no failures or advanced standing, is an expectation, not a goal. Any efforts that might have energized her students to work harder on one class exercise or another would go unnoticed. Aside from comments by students here and there, no one would know how good this teacher really is.
A good teacher is somebody who awakes in you something that did not exist before. A good teacher changes you in a way that means you cannot go back even if you want to.
I'd say that's as good a definition of a good teacher as anyone could think of, and the author, Eleanor Catton, is still a student. Remarkable.
I read many arguments and comments about "good" teachers and "quality" teachers as well as "bad" teachers and that teachers should be evaluated much like other private sector workers.
But, if I follow that definition above, how can I, if I was a principal or school board member, know if I can get that kind of performance out of every teacher?
In the private sector, managers sit down with employees and review group and personal goals for the next quarter or fiscal year. Some goals are quantifiable--sales, cost savings being the best examples--and some are not. But employer and employee know the goals. Assuming the employer is performing satisfactorily and the employee is, too, the employee has some idea about his raise.
This process is much harder to do with teachers. For one thing, they usually don't "manage" the same people every year. They would need to know something about the students in each class before the start of the school, so that they can set goals for each student, as opposed to a full class. Some students may be on grade level in reading and math, others may be advanced, others may be behind.
If a principal knows his teachers, he will know who works best with the students who are behind in grade level, who can keep the average student's interests, and who can expand upon the abilities of the most gifted. At least I'd hope so.
Different students have different goals. A good teacher for one group of students will not be a good teacher for a totally different group. The smart principals and assistant principals would match classes to teacher talents--if they had the evidence to do it.
In an ideal situation, a teacher would read and know the prior test scores and evaluations of her incoming classes before the start of the school year. She would set goals around the individual students--some will need more attention than others--as well as the lesson plans for the full class.
Some students will not be on grade level before the start of the school year. They will need more tutoring, possibly after hours. Bringing them to grade level would be a major achievement, even if they did not pass a state-developed test. The better students will need some form of extra credit to keep them interested. Keeping their attention within a classroom of mixed abilities would be a major achievement, too.
This is why I don't believe in evaluating teachers, especially elementary school teachers, by results on state-developed standardized tests.
Evaluations based on test results help teachers who teach the average student. But a 100 percent "pass" rate, no failures or advanced standing, is an expectation, not a goal. Any efforts that might have energized her students to work harder on one class exercise or another would go unnoticed. Aside from comments by students here and there, no one would know how good this teacher really is.
Monday, May 17, 2010
Don't Give Too Much Advice for Free to Get A Job
Slightly more than a month ago, I put up attorney Donna Ballman's post to answer a question: When Is An Unpaid Internship Illegal? Today, I want to continue this discussion. It has made its rounds in education media lately.
Last week, my friend and teacher Gene DeLibero, an expert in all things digital media, wrote a similar post on his blog. Gene wrote this piece called Everyone Needs to Get Paid to help adults as well as students find jobs in the digital world.
Gene's premise is this: too many employers ask candidates to do comp work, and give them only remote hope of a job offer. To quote Gene:
The issue here, I believe, is that many of the people who expect you to work for free have limited soft skills, crummy people skills, and even less business smarts.
Not to mention a warped sense of business ethics.
Gene did not touch specifically on this issue of college students, so I'd like to add remarks to help them.
These days corporate employers who paid interns in better economic times now hire interns only if they may receive college credit for the work experience. Worse, they ask the student's school to certify the internship as credit worthy.
In effect, the employer has a work plan in mind for the intern. It may include challenging work, something usually worthy of academic credit, or it may include administrative grunt work that is not.
There are many prestigious internships in entertainment, politics and sports offer grunt work for no pay. But they do not always come with college credit, especially if they do not run in tandem with a college course.
Several years ago, I hired an intern through a New York City summer program. Her program offered a for-credit course about New York City history and politics, as well as a job-related project. I wrote a job description to satisfy her program's needs as well as mine. That was not a problem for me. I worked for a small company and we had no shortage of responsibilities for an intern.
If the school is not in the position of getting an employer to change the work plan, then they have no reason to deem an internship credit-worthy. Besides, why should a college career counselor or internship adviser put a rubber stamp on a bad internship to help an employer save minimum wage?
I urge you to read Gene's article. It puts the right spin on free work.
Last week, my friend and teacher Gene DeLibero, an expert in all things digital media, wrote a similar post on his blog. Gene wrote this piece called Everyone Needs to Get Paid to help adults as well as students find jobs in the digital world.
Gene's premise is this: too many employers ask candidates to do comp work, and give them only remote hope of a job offer. To quote Gene:
The issue here, I believe, is that many of the people who expect you to work for free have limited soft skills, crummy people skills, and even less business smarts.
Not to mention a warped sense of business ethics.
Gene did not touch specifically on this issue of college students, so I'd like to add remarks to help them.
These days corporate employers who paid interns in better economic times now hire interns only if they may receive college credit for the work experience. Worse, they ask the student's school to certify the internship as credit worthy.
In effect, the employer has a work plan in mind for the intern. It may include challenging work, something usually worthy of academic credit, or it may include administrative grunt work that is not.
There are many prestigious internships in entertainment, politics and sports offer grunt work for no pay. But they do not always come with college credit, especially if they do not run in tandem with a college course.
Several years ago, I hired an intern through a New York City summer program. Her program offered a for-credit course about New York City history and politics, as well as a job-related project. I wrote a job description to satisfy her program's needs as well as mine. That was not a problem for me. I worked for a small company and we had no shortage of responsibilities for an intern.
If the school is not in the position of getting an employer to change the work plan, then they have no reason to deem an internship credit-worthy. Besides, why should a college career counselor or internship adviser put a rubber stamp on a bad internship to help an employer save minimum wage?
I urge you to read Gene's article. It puts the right spin on free work.
Friday, May 14, 2010
ROTC Officer Candidate Brings New Reason to Repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"
Today I read a story in the Chronicle of Higher Education about a soon-to-be graduate of the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill who may be asked to replay approximately $80,000 to the U.S. Army for her ROTC Scholarship. The reason? The officer-candidate came out as a lesbian.
I've written about the reasons to repeal the military's policy of "don't ask--don't tell" on a few occasions. I'm calling attention to this post because it presented another reason: the potential loss of a scholarship. The story also called attention to the military officer culture.
Don't ask-don't tell is arcane; it is a reminder of similar thoughts, such as "unit cohesion," once used to justify the exclusion of women and blacks from military service. A strong military should represent the values of the flag it flies, and Americans value diversity and non-discrimination.
Under the current policies, this woman will need to repay the money, though the Army has not rendered a final decision. Even she does not deny that the debt awaits, but she wonders why the Army has not dismissed her so close to her commission date. I would also be concerned for what might happen to her should she be allowed to accept a commission and continue a military career.
That does not mean that there are no possibilities.
What if those who support repeal raise the funds to repay the Army on her behalf?
That may sound hypocritical at first, to pay the organization that acted in a discriminatory way. But it will send a message, too. A college student who accepted a military scholarship, ready to serve her country, should not be made to permanently suffer financially at her country's hand.
If you support repeal, as I do, help this woman to get on with her life. She earned her chemistry degree. Presumably, she qualifies for admission to medical school, the direction she wanted to go. Maybe she will receive a scholarship for taking a personally principled stand.
If anyone takes up a collection on this matter, let me know. I'll send a contribution.
I've written about the reasons to repeal the military's policy of "don't ask--don't tell" on a few occasions. I'm calling attention to this post because it presented another reason: the potential loss of a scholarship. The story also called attention to the military officer culture.
Don't ask-don't tell is arcane; it is a reminder of similar thoughts, such as "unit cohesion," once used to justify the exclusion of women and blacks from military service. A strong military should represent the values of the flag it flies, and Americans value diversity and non-discrimination.
Under the current policies, this woman will need to repay the money, though the Army has not rendered a final decision. Even she does not deny that the debt awaits, but she wonders why the Army has not dismissed her so close to her commission date. I would also be concerned for what might happen to her should she be allowed to accept a commission and continue a military career.
That does not mean that there are no possibilities.
What if those who support repeal raise the funds to repay the Army on her behalf?
That may sound hypocritical at first, to pay the organization that acted in a discriminatory way. But it will send a message, too. A college student who accepted a military scholarship, ready to serve her country, should not be made to permanently suffer financially at her country's hand.
If you support repeal, as I do, help this woman to get on with her life. She earned her chemistry degree. Presumably, she qualifies for admission to medical school, the direction she wanted to go. Maybe she will receive a scholarship for taking a personally principled stand.
If anyone takes up a collection on this matter, let me know. I'll send a contribution.
Thursday, May 13, 2010
Can Public Colleges and Universities Compete More Favorably For Non-Traditional Students?
I'm sorry that I missed Frontline's segment on for-profit colleges. But I have read several comments, including those by Education Secretary Duncan. So,I took a look at a recent (May, 2010) U.S. News story that listed the largest online graduate programs in business, education, engineering, library science, Nursing and Public Health. The for-profits have shied away from engineering and library science, so those subjects will not be discussed.
The University of Phoenix has the largest online business program, by far, with over 26,000 students. Walden University, DeVry University and Capella University collectively enroll over 14,000 students.
Walden University has the largest online education program with approximately 21,000 students. The U of Phoenix has nearly 17,000. Capella about 6,000.
The University of Phoenix and Walden run 1-2 for graduate online nursing education. Collectively, they enroll more than 10,000 students. Walden is also well established in the public health field and enrolls nearly 3,900 students there.
Why rattle off these numbers?
To raise the major point: the larger for-profit schools offer something the non-profits do not. Either they are more flexible to the needs of adult students or they offer a proper credential for less time. Otherwise, they would not exist. The large public universities, in particular, would be able to satisfy the need. Or they would join forces with similar institutions to do it.
Lately, I read arguments that discuss the "cost to the taxpayer" for education. Most publicly supported schools receive state subsidy; that's covered by the taxpayers. Most states provide financial aid to students to attend any accredited school; that's covered by the taxpayers, too. One could argue that a public university student on financial aid is doubly subsidized, a student at a for-profit is not, so therefore, the for-profits are less cost to the taxpayer.
But isn't it a state's mission, in part, to provide an affordable and high-quality education that is respected by employers and peer schools? Or is that mission limited to the traditional student because of budget and space limitations? Here in New Jersey, Thomas Edison State College, a publicly funded adult-oriented school has been zeroed out of the governor's 2011 budget.
If the leadership of the leading schools, especially the public universities, wish to educate adults as well as traditional students, they would be wise to study how the for-profits manage a school calendar and use technology. The campus is not the attraction for this audience, but parking or mass transit is a necessity for those who want in-person instruction. Flexibility and accessible faculty are the draw for the for-profits. Academics who consider research to be their primary job will not fit that skill set.
If they believe their market is the traditional student, then they have no right to wiggle fingers at the schools that best accommodate the non-traditional students.
It will be easier, and less costly, for the for-profit schools to build up a career center and help their students tackle the job market than it will be for a public institution to build up a quality school to better serve non-traditional students. Once those career centers earn more respect from employers, the for-profits will achieve a sustainable competitive advantage. Don't believe, for one minute, that they're not trying to achieve it quickly.
The University of Phoenix has the largest online business program, by far, with over 26,000 students. Walden University, DeVry University and Capella University collectively enroll over 14,000 students.
Walden University has the largest online education program with approximately 21,000 students. The U of Phoenix has nearly 17,000. Capella about 6,000.
The University of Phoenix and Walden run 1-2 for graduate online nursing education. Collectively, they enroll more than 10,000 students. Walden is also well established in the public health field and enrolls nearly 3,900 students there.
Why rattle off these numbers?
To raise the major point: the larger for-profit schools offer something the non-profits do not. Either they are more flexible to the needs of adult students or they offer a proper credential for less time. Otherwise, they would not exist. The large public universities, in particular, would be able to satisfy the need. Or they would join forces with similar institutions to do it.
Lately, I read arguments that discuss the "cost to the taxpayer" for education. Most publicly supported schools receive state subsidy; that's covered by the taxpayers. Most states provide financial aid to students to attend any accredited school; that's covered by the taxpayers, too. One could argue that a public university student on financial aid is doubly subsidized, a student at a for-profit is not, so therefore, the for-profits are less cost to the taxpayer.
But isn't it a state's mission, in part, to provide an affordable and high-quality education that is respected by employers and peer schools? Or is that mission limited to the traditional student because of budget and space limitations? Here in New Jersey, Thomas Edison State College, a publicly funded adult-oriented school has been zeroed out of the governor's 2011 budget.
If the leadership of the leading schools, especially the public universities, wish to educate adults as well as traditional students, they would be wise to study how the for-profits manage a school calendar and use technology. The campus is not the attraction for this audience, but parking or mass transit is a necessity for those who want in-person instruction. Flexibility and accessible faculty are the draw for the for-profits. Academics who consider research to be their primary job will not fit that skill set.
If they believe their market is the traditional student, then they have no right to wiggle fingers at the schools that best accommodate the non-traditional students.
It will be easier, and less costly, for the for-profit schools to build up a career center and help their students tackle the job market than it will be for a public institution to build up a quality school to better serve non-traditional students. Once those career centers earn more respect from employers, the for-profits will achieve a sustainable competitive advantage. Don't believe, for one minute, that they're not trying to achieve it quickly.
A Message for the Overzealous Tea Partiers: Get On the Short Bus and Go Home
I've spent a little time writing about the Tea Party Movement. While I respect the right of any citizen, regardless of politics, to peacefully protest and articulate their views, I find their portraits comparing President Obama to Adolf Hitler to be inappropriate and offensive.
My mother came to this country from Austria in 1940 to escape from the Nazis and their treatment of the Jews in Eastern Europe. So, I feel compelled to address this misleading message.
As a writer I've become more of a student of American history so, for a moment, I would like to ask you to imagine past events with me.
It is the fall of 1939. America is still in the throws of economic depression. Hitler's troops have invaded Poland. Conservatives in the U.S. Congress favor isolationism over military aid to Great Britain and France. U.S. corporations, including Ford and IBM, were doing business in Germany.
And the United States Army is smaller than the Polish Army the Germans have just defeated.
President Roosevelt, the New Deal Liberal, is watching a news reel with his diplomats and military advisers. The first part of the news reel shows German troops in battle. The second shows more troops, more formally dressed, marching in review in front of Chancellor Hitler. As the troops pass in review they salute "Sieg Heil!" And the chancellor salutes back.
The news reel stops. The president stands. Every one rises from their seats, too.
Roosevelt turns to each man, then says: "If we don't stop him, there will be Facism." Not socialism, the president believes, but a dictatorship run through hate by a man who believes he leads a master race.
A Democratic president protected our freedom.
He used the power of government to do it.
He brought business into the service of our country to do it.
He preserved the necessary roles of government and assistance at home while the nation was at war, including the distribution of the first Social Security benefits.
Any Tea Partier who continues to produce a portrait of Obama as Hitler should get on a short bus, go home and take a look through their tea leaves. They might not like what they see.
My mother came to this country from Austria in 1940 to escape from the Nazis and their treatment of the Jews in Eastern Europe. So, I feel compelled to address this misleading message.
As a writer I've become more of a student of American history so, for a moment, I would like to ask you to imagine past events with me.
It is the fall of 1939. America is still in the throws of economic depression. Hitler's troops have invaded Poland. Conservatives in the U.S. Congress favor isolationism over military aid to Great Britain and France. U.S. corporations, including Ford and IBM, were doing business in Germany.
And the United States Army is smaller than the Polish Army the Germans have just defeated.
President Roosevelt, the New Deal Liberal, is watching a news reel with his diplomats and military advisers. The first part of the news reel shows German troops in battle. The second shows more troops, more formally dressed, marching in review in front of Chancellor Hitler. As the troops pass in review they salute "Sieg Heil!" And the chancellor salutes back.
The news reel stops. The president stands. Every one rises from their seats, too.
Roosevelt turns to each man, then says: "If we don't stop him, there will be Facism." Not socialism, the president believes, but a dictatorship run through hate by a man who believes he leads a master race.
A Democratic president protected our freedom.
He used the power of government to do it.
He brought business into the service of our country to do it.
He preserved the necessary roles of government and assistance at home while the nation was at war, including the distribution of the first Social Security benefits.
Any Tea Partier who continues to produce a portrait of Obama as Hitler should get on a short bus, go home and take a look through their tea leaves. They might not like what they see.
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
Book Review: Skies to Conquer, A Year Inside the Air Force Academy by Diana Jean Schemo
There have been several journalistic accounts of "a year at a military academy."
All have similarities; they talk about rigorous training, the breakdown and build-up of recent high graduates in to leaders, the seemingly silly demands to recite minutia on history and tradition on the demand, the recognition of first-years and the anxieties of those who are on their way to their first posts as officers.
None of these books are "bad." They are honest, quite informative and useful to those considering a military academy, as well as those who survived to graduate.
Diana Jean Schemo, however, has taken some different twists. She visited the U.S. Air Force Academy following the conclusion of a sexual harassment and assault investigation as well as the removal of a commandant, among others, advanced Evangelical Christianity within the corps.
Schemo's visit takes place in the second year of the appointment of Brigadier General Susan Desjardins as the first female commandant of the academy. Desjardins, who had never been an instructor or educator prior to her appointment, was also a member of the Academy's Class of 1980, the first to graduate women.
Desjardin's fingerprints have entered various aspects of cadet training, called First Beast and Second Beast. To prevent recurrence of assault and harassment, the most intensive portion of training, called Jacks Valley, is partly conducted by instructors from Air Force bases, as opposed to high ranking members of the senior class. Juniors and seniors do not like this; they consider the training to be "soft," and resent the loss of authority and trust.
But I read this story wondering if the so-called Cadre, the doolie's (first-years) most feared tormentors, do not understand the difference between hazing and leadership. It is one thing to break people down so they learn to follow before they earn the opportunity to lead. It is another for twenty one year olds to physically abuse or humiliate a comrade to the brink of psychological damage. The academy is not asking them simulate an enemy interrogation.
Schemo makes another interesting point throughout this story. The Air Force is changing more than other branches of the military. Doolies choose this college life often with the hope of becoming pilots. However, pilots are becoming more obsolete.
The emerging Air Force is a team where a majority could be technologists who will support unmanned flight, as opposed to a human pilot. That requires a different skill set. It also means disappointment for many who hoped to earn their wings. It also means that airmen (the title for academy students) learn ground combat tactics and techniques quite similar to army training.
Also, according to this story, sentiments towards Evangelical Christianity remain very much a part of academy culture. Part of this is due to the academy's location in Colorado, home of Promise Keepers and the Focus on the Family, among other organizations.
However, there are disconcerting statements about non-Christians being "tolerated and sometimes accommodated." I consider a military academy to be ultimate when it comes to fairness. Everyone admitted receives a free education. No one receives favorable treatment based on family status when they are in class or in training. That fairness must extend to religion. But, go to page 160, and there is a Christmas greeting some might find surprising for a 21st century institution.
This is a very good book from the standpoint of telling the reader about the persons who fit in with the Air Force Academy culture and those who do not. Aspiring pilots should also keep in mind that while an academy degree is not necessary to fly in the Air Force, it is almost a prerequisite towards making general.
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
A Salary Cap May Be An Answer for Pro Sports But Not Teachers
Yesterday I read that New Jersey governor Chris Christie has proposed 33 separate civil service reforms. Among them is a two and a half percent cap on salary increases. According to the news coverage the cap will apply to all public employees, whether or not they are covered under civil service laws.
I realize that reporters do not always go too deep into civil service reform; it's not a sexy news topic. But, having served in state government and either consulted or marketed to government agencies and public colleges, I believe the cap may be a hindrance to reform, not a helping hand.
I see two purposes to the cap. One is to encourage the more experienced employees, those earning the highest salaries, to leave public service or retire. The second is to hold down the "cost of government," meaning that wages will practically never rise faster than tax revenues.
I can imagine that experienced and talented public employees--there are many, contrary to Governor Christie's low opinion of public sector workers--take a look at their future: no promotions left, the possibility of paying more into health care, and the cap, and saying "this is it." They will not make more money; in fact, they may take home less. Then you lose the best people who know the most.
That's the first consequence. The second is that you dissuade bright young people from entering public service, outside of electoral politics. Especially those who might have considered becoming teachers.
Lets say an entry-level elementary school teacher is hired at a salary of $35,000. She needs to work three years to earn tenure. During those three years she may decide not to pursue a master's degree because tenure is uncertain. After three years, she is earning approximately $40,500.
In a bad economy, she will do okay; she has a job and she is getting regular raises. In a good economy she'll earn much less than she would have made in the private sector as a management trainee in a retail business or as a sales rep. School districts must consider that when they are faced with losing a math or science teacher to private industry. The cap practically assures that teacher will be gone.
Also in civil service, the bottom of the salary range often goes up each year, same as in the private sector. The teachers who started at $35,000 in 2010 start at approximately $35,900, assuming the entry level salary increases by 2.5 percent. The entry level salary is affected by the cap, too. It's very difficult to recruit new teachers at the same or lower salaries than the teachers you hired the year before.
What happens? The salary of the first year teacher and the salary of the second year teacher are the same because the cap applies to everyone. The experienced teacher has gained essentially nothing for her experience.
The same is true for other public service jobs, however occupations such as police and fire have their measures. Both keep statistics and incident reports. If there are fewer crimes or fires, they are not punished at budget time. There are also tests for promotion into higher rank, as there are in civil service.
None of this exists in teaching.
If someone were to say that we need new tools to evaluate teacher performance, I'd agree. If I was told that we need a compensation plan that better rewards the best teachers, I would agree. If a politician suggested a base pay and bonus plan, I would encourage an investigation into the idea, provided the school system would always be in a position to pay the bonuses promised.
A cap may make Chris Christie look good if the state economy stays weak. He will have held the line on budgets and taxes. However, if the economy improves, good teachers will have little incentive to stay teachers.
I realize that reporters do not always go too deep into civil service reform; it's not a sexy news topic. But, having served in state government and either consulted or marketed to government agencies and public colleges, I believe the cap may be a hindrance to reform, not a helping hand.
I see two purposes to the cap. One is to encourage the more experienced employees, those earning the highest salaries, to leave public service or retire. The second is to hold down the "cost of government," meaning that wages will practically never rise faster than tax revenues.
I can imagine that experienced and talented public employees--there are many, contrary to Governor Christie's low opinion of public sector workers--take a look at their future: no promotions left, the possibility of paying more into health care, and the cap, and saying "this is it." They will not make more money; in fact, they may take home less. Then you lose the best people who know the most.
That's the first consequence. The second is that you dissuade bright young people from entering public service, outside of electoral politics. Especially those who might have considered becoming teachers.
Lets say an entry-level elementary school teacher is hired at a salary of $35,000. She needs to work three years to earn tenure. During those three years she may decide not to pursue a master's degree because tenure is uncertain. After three years, she is earning approximately $40,500.
In a bad economy, she will do okay; she has a job and she is getting regular raises. In a good economy she'll earn much less than she would have made in the private sector as a management trainee in a retail business or as a sales rep. School districts must consider that when they are faced with losing a math or science teacher to private industry. The cap practically assures that teacher will be gone.
Also in civil service, the bottom of the salary range often goes up each year, same as in the private sector. The teachers who started at $35,000 in 2010 start at approximately $35,900, assuming the entry level salary increases by 2.5 percent. The entry level salary is affected by the cap, too. It's very difficult to recruit new teachers at the same or lower salaries than the teachers you hired the year before.
What happens? The salary of the first year teacher and the salary of the second year teacher are the same because the cap applies to everyone. The experienced teacher has gained essentially nothing for her experience.
The same is true for other public service jobs, however occupations such as police and fire have their measures. Both keep statistics and incident reports. If there are fewer crimes or fires, they are not punished at budget time. There are also tests for promotion into higher rank, as there are in civil service.
None of this exists in teaching.
If someone were to say that we need new tools to evaluate teacher performance, I'd agree. If I was told that we need a compensation plan that better rewards the best teachers, I would agree. If a politician suggested a base pay and bonus plan, I would encourage an investigation into the idea, provided the school system would always be in a position to pay the bonuses promised.
A cap may make Chris Christie look good if the state economy stays weak. He will have held the line on budgets and taxes. However, if the economy improves, good teachers will have little incentive to stay teachers.
Friday, May 7, 2010
Four Years of Recession, Four Years of Underemployment for College Graduates
Today I'm reading a somewhat gripping story in the Chronicle of Higher Education about entry level employment hiring for the Class of 2010. The story is gripping for the headline: Career-Service Centers Strive to Help the Class of 2010—and 2009, and 2008
That gave me pause. A slow reviving economy has meant that possibly a full college class, the class of 2011 will have gone through four years of a very difficult entry level job market. Employers will have suffered, too. The employees they might have hired in 2008 could have included high-potential candidates for managerial slots.
The classes of 2008 and 2009 will have faced such severe underemployment, holding jobs at low pay outside their field of interest, that they may not have the opportunity to get out of underemployment, unless they think entrepreneurially or return to school. And, in some fields, such as business careers or education, these students will compete for entry level positions all over again.
This story discusses how career counselors are using social media: Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, and so on to help students and alumni find employment. Career counselors, in very large part, are thoughtful in their efforts. These tools extend their thoughtfulness like never before.
I read this story and appreciate these efforts having worked with career counselors for ten years, and having graduated in 1982 into a recessionary economy. We did not have the technology back then, but our recession was much shorter.
Not wanting to be underemployed, I went right into graduate school. A year and a half later, I found a job with internship experience and a master's degree. But I was still a student all that time. I would have preferred to work for a year or two instead.
The classes of 2008, 2009, 2010 and quite possibly 2011 face the same choices I did. I feel for these kids; some are sons and daughters of my friends. I also hope that the classes of 2012 and later learn from the experiences of the graduates before them.
The message here is: you make your life, so prepare as early as you can. Find your passion and spend as much time as you can around it, inside the classroom and out. A recession can come at any moment and it can last longer than you think. You must recession-proof yourself by honing your skills and becoming better at the work you like to do.
That gave me pause. A slow reviving economy has meant that possibly a full college class, the class of 2011 will have gone through four years of a very difficult entry level job market. Employers will have suffered, too. The employees they might have hired in 2008 could have included high-potential candidates for managerial slots.
The classes of 2008 and 2009 will have faced such severe underemployment, holding jobs at low pay outside their field of interest, that they may not have the opportunity to get out of underemployment, unless they think entrepreneurially or return to school. And, in some fields, such as business careers or education, these students will compete for entry level positions all over again.
This story discusses how career counselors are using social media: Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, and so on to help students and alumni find employment. Career counselors, in very large part, are thoughtful in their efforts. These tools extend their thoughtfulness like never before.
I read this story and appreciate these efforts having worked with career counselors for ten years, and having graduated in 1982 into a recessionary economy. We did not have the technology back then, but our recession was much shorter.
Not wanting to be underemployed, I went right into graduate school. A year and a half later, I found a job with internship experience and a master's degree. But I was still a student all that time. I would have preferred to work for a year or two instead.
The classes of 2008, 2009, 2010 and quite possibly 2011 face the same choices I did. I feel for these kids; some are sons and daughters of my friends. I also hope that the classes of 2012 and later learn from the experiences of the graduates before them.
The message here is: you make your life, so prepare as early as you can. Find your passion and spend as much time as you can around it, inside the classroom and out. A recession can come at any moment and it can last longer than you think. You must recession-proof yourself by honing your skills and becoming better at the work you like to do.
Thursday, May 6, 2010
Three Ways Online Educators Use Social Networking Tools to Enhance the Learning Experience. Guest Post by Anna Miller
Having worked in educational technology, I have become more curious as to how social media tools can be used for teaching and learning. Anna Miller writes on online education and she has much to say about this subject. I would like to thank her for providing this guest post, special to Educated Quest.
There’s no doubting the fact that social networking has redefined the way we interact with people and share our thoughts. It has taken our world by storm and redefined the way we communicate. And although it has relegated privacy to the background and made open books of our lives, although it is seen as a waste of time and a major distraction at the workplace, there are a few good things about social networks too.
For one, it is a valuable marketing tool that can be tapped to promote businesses and services. And for another, it provides innovative ways to take education to a whole new level.
When it comes to online education, there are certain barriers to effective communication because of the distance between the educator and the student and the absence of body language.
Social media helps to bridge the gap using videos and other interactive tools that compensate for the lack of personal interaction in online education. The best ways online educators can use social networking tools to enhance the learning experience is through:
• Online video sites: While sites like YouTube are still the most popular ways to share video, there are other video-sharing sites that are dedicated to education and where you can control content to a limit. Videos can be used to teach lessons that cannot be understood through text alone and also to help students who need much more than theoretical instructions to understand the subject.
• Wikis: They’ve replaced the encyclopedia as an easy and convenient way to look up information and research various topics. Personalized wikis can be created for students to refer when they’re studying or as augmentation to the lessons they’ve been provided with as part of the curriculum. Wikis that are developed in a language that’s not too technical and easy to understand are valuable study tools for online students.
• Social networking pages: Dedicated pages set up for a class can serve as a forum for discussion where students can exchange ideas, ask and answer questions, and take part in general and specific discussions. The pages are places where educators can post news and updates and students can interact with both their peers and their teachers.
Today’s youngsters are born with an addiction to and an affinity for technology. They take to it with an ease that the older generation cannot understand. So it’s only natural that we look to social media as a way to enhance the learning experience and tap its potential to make education interesting and informative.
Anna Miller writes for Online Degree, a resource on more than 450 online degree programs and various online education topics. Anna welcomes your comments at her email id: anna.miller009@gmail.com
There’s no doubting the fact that social networking has redefined the way we interact with people and share our thoughts. It has taken our world by storm and redefined the way we communicate. And although it has relegated privacy to the background and made open books of our lives, although it is seen as a waste of time and a major distraction at the workplace, there are a few good things about social networks too.
For one, it is a valuable marketing tool that can be tapped to promote businesses and services. And for another, it provides innovative ways to take education to a whole new level.
When it comes to online education, there are certain barriers to effective communication because of the distance between the educator and the student and the absence of body language.
Social media helps to bridge the gap using videos and other interactive tools that compensate for the lack of personal interaction in online education. The best ways online educators can use social networking tools to enhance the learning experience is through:
• Online video sites: While sites like YouTube are still the most popular ways to share video, there are other video-sharing sites that are dedicated to education and where you can control content to a limit. Videos can be used to teach lessons that cannot be understood through text alone and also to help students who need much more than theoretical instructions to understand the subject.
• Wikis: They’ve replaced the encyclopedia as an easy and convenient way to look up information and research various topics. Personalized wikis can be created for students to refer when they’re studying or as augmentation to the lessons they’ve been provided with as part of the curriculum. Wikis that are developed in a language that’s not too technical and easy to understand are valuable study tools for online students.
• Social networking pages: Dedicated pages set up for a class can serve as a forum for discussion where students can exchange ideas, ask and answer questions, and take part in general and specific discussions. The pages are places where educators can post news and updates and students can interact with both their peers and their teachers.
Today’s youngsters are born with an addiction to and an affinity for technology. They take to it with an ease that the older generation cannot understand. So it’s only natural that we look to social media as a way to enhance the learning experience and tap its potential to make education interesting and informative.
Anna Miller writes for Online Degree, a resource on more than 450 online degree programs and various online education topics. Anna welcomes your comments at her email id: anna.miller009@gmail.com
Wednesday, May 5, 2010
New Jersey's Parochial School Recovery Act of 2010
On Monday New Jersey Governor Chris Christie announced his plan for school choice. It is called the Opportunities Scholarship Act, and it has Democratic and Republican sponsorship at the onset. The bill also has the endorsement of numerous leaders in the state's religious community, including the urban centers.
The bill calls for scholarships, $6,000 for students in grades K through 8, $9,000 for grades 9 through 12, that go to students in low income families who live within districts that contain failing public schools.
A failing school is one where no more than 40 percent of all students fail to pass state math and language arts tests, or 65 percent fail to pass one test for two consecutive years. There are 31 school districts with over 200 failing schools.
Funding will come from corporate tax credits; tax receipts reserved for scholarships will be $24 million for the first year, increasing by $24 million each year for up to five years. To put the amount in perspective, $24 million could pay full tuition for 2,000 students to attend Rutgers or a state college.
Participating private and parochial schools that wish to take advantage of this program must accept the scholarship as full tuition. They cannot discriminate on the basis of athletic ability, disability, race or academic ability. However, there is no mention of religion.
The news coverage of this bill has been interesting, so far. Governor Christie has called this bill a voucher program, while the New Jersey Catholic Conference, ironically, has not. Governor Christie, has, however, called the bill a "final solution." A very poor choice of words.
Christie has also made this comment, which is not entirely correct:
"A single mother in Newark working two jobs to keep a roof over her child’s head should have no less ability to make that choice than my wife and I had," he said.
This bill will offer a way out for some students in failing schools, but it will not offer that mother the same choices available to our governor, who is a millionaire. It might as well be called the Parochial School Recovery Act.
The tuition limits specified in the bill are more in tune with tuition charged by urban and working class suburban parochial schools than the best private and parochial schools in New Jersey. The leading private schools charge in excess of $20,000, and they have their own scholarship funds. They do not need to be a part of this program. Neither do public schools in neighboring districts, if they face cuts and have no room to take out-of-district students.
Seton Hall Prep, for example, a Catholic college preparatory school in northern New Jersey charges nearly $12,000 for tuition. However, Saint Anthony's in Jersey City charges $4,900, St. Benedict's Prep charges $5,900, Hudson Catholic $7,700 and St. Dominic Academy $7,500. Tuition alone does not cover the full cost of educating these students; it is also supported by fundraising and endowments, just like colleges.
Parochial schools in economically depressed areas such as Jersey City and Newark have suffered just as the public schools have suffered. There have been fewer students who can afford the tuition and diminished sources to boost the endowment when the economy goes sour. This bill is, in effect, a rescue plan for these schools.
The preference for choice, especially for elementary school students, is likely to be a school close to home. This scholarship program does not cover transportation, unless the student already lives along the existing bus route.
Setting aside the argument of church versus state--and assuming the sponsors of this bill have tested that argument against the state constitution--this bill is fraught with problems.
First, unlike public schools, parochial schools have no geographic limits. They are boundary less enterprises. Close to home in a densely populated state like New Jersey can mean that students from several failing schools will need to compete for seats in the parochial schools.
All other factors being equal, what would be the determinant over who's in and who's out? Religion. The bill calls for a lottery when there is competition for seats in a grade. However, what is to say that religion cannot be used to weed out applicants, when the bill does not prohibit discrimination on the basis of religion?
Not to mention, those who come out losers in a lottery are denied a choice they wanted. A lottery is an admission that there are going to be winners and losers. So, not all students eligible for choice will have the same choices.
Second, while this bill does not directly appropriate public money to private schools, it reduces corporate tax receipts that could be used for many purposes besides education.
Governor Christie has introduced this bill at the same time he has cut aid to public schools, called for budget caps on public schools as well as caps on municipal property tax increases. In effect, he is saying: public cuts are permanent.
If cuts are permanent, then how will public schools get better and become more competitive? No entity, public or private, ever cuts their way to success. And, if tax receipts are less than projected, then other public programs could be cut to fulfill the obligations of this legislation.
Third, parochial schools receive no federal funding under No Child Left Behind. They do not need to comply with those policies. The more responsible schools will test their students anyway; they need the tuition and have a reputation to protect with parents, colleges and schools in the higher grades.
However, how do we know that the schools with more modest budgets are capable of the same quality as the better endowed schools?
Fourth, the bill states applies to students "eligible" to attend a failing school who meet an income guideline. Does eligible mean that the student must live in the neighborhood around the failing school, or within anyplace in the district?
In some cases, the district will have some passing schools and some failing schools. Should a student who has the option of transfer to a passing school within the same district be allowed to receive a scholarship to leave the district? Would that be fair to a student who had no public options?
Fifth, and most important. What evidence is there that parochial schools that would be on the brink of closing without the scholarship program can manage their fiscal affairs better than the public schools?
This is exceptionally important, because $24 million per class in year one is more than $24 million per class in year five. The subsidy decreases every year for each class.
A parochial school that accepts these students must raise money to cover annual cost increases; the state will not allow them to charge tuition to scholarship students in later years. Can these schools raise sufficient funds and expand their endowments to allow them to retain these students while maintaining a quality education?
I would be very concerned if a parochial school near financial failure received a government-supported, though not government-funded, subsidy over public schools.
The bill calls for scholarships, $6,000 for students in grades K through 8, $9,000 for grades 9 through 12, that go to students in low income families who live within districts that contain failing public schools.
A failing school is one where no more than 40 percent of all students fail to pass state math and language arts tests, or 65 percent fail to pass one test for two consecutive years. There are 31 school districts with over 200 failing schools.
Funding will come from corporate tax credits; tax receipts reserved for scholarships will be $24 million for the first year, increasing by $24 million each year for up to five years. To put the amount in perspective, $24 million could pay full tuition for 2,000 students to attend Rutgers or a state college.
Participating private and parochial schools that wish to take advantage of this program must accept the scholarship as full tuition. They cannot discriminate on the basis of athletic ability, disability, race or academic ability. However, there is no mention of religion.
The news coverage of this bill has been interesting, so far. Governor Christie has called this bill a voucher program, while the New Jersey Catholic Conference, ironically, has not. Governor Christie, has, however, called the bill a "final solution." A very poor choice of words.
Christie has also made this comment, which is not entirely correct:
"A single mother in Newark working two jobs to keep a roof over her child’s head should have no less ability to make that choice than my wife and I had," he said.
This bill will offer a way out for some students in failing schools, but it will not offer that mother the same choices available to our governor, who is a millionaire. It might as well be called the Parochial School Recovery Act.
The tuition limits specified in the bill are more in tune with tuition charged by urban and working class suburban parochial schools than the best private and parochial schools in New Jersey. The leading private schools charge in excess of $20,000, and they have their own scholarship funds. They do not need to be a part of this program. Neither do public schools in neighboring districts, if they face cuts and have no room to take out-of-district students.
Seton Hall Prep, for example, a Catholic college preparatory school in northern New Jersey charges nearly $12,000 for tuition. However, Saint Anthony's in Jersey City charges $4,900, St. Benedict's Prep charges $5,900, Hudson Catholic $7,700 and St. Dominic Academy $7,500. Tuition alone does not cover the full cost of educating these students; it is also supported by fundraising and endowments, just like colleges.
Parochial schools in economically depressed areas such as Jersey City and Newark have suffered just as the public schools have suffered. There have been fewer students who can afford the tuition and diminished sources to boost the endowment when the economy goes sour. This bill is, in effect, a rescue plan for these schools.
The preference for choice, especially for elementary school students, is likely to be a school close to home. This scholarship program does not cover transportation, unless the student already lives along the existing bus route.
Setting aside the argument of church versus state--and assuming the sponsors of this bill have tested that argument against the state constitution--this bill is fraught with problems.
First, unlike public schools, parochial schools have no geographic limits. They are boundary less enterprises. Close to home in a densely populated state like New Jersey can mean that students from several failing schools will need to compete for seats in the parochial schools.
All other factors being equal, what would be the determinant over who's in and who's out? Religion. The bill calls for a lottery when there is competition for seats in a grade. However, what is to say that religion cannot be used to weed out applicants, when the bill does not prohibit discrimination on the basis of religion?
Not to mention, those who come out losers in a lottery are denied a choice they wanted. A lottery is an admission that there are going to be winners and losers. So, not all students eligible for choice will have the same choices.
Second, while this bill does not directly appropriate public money to private schools, it reduces corporate tax receipts that could be used for many purposes besides education.
Governor Christie has introduced this bill at the same time he has cut aid to public schools, called for budget caps on public schools as well as caps on municipal property tax increases. In effect, he is saying: public cuts are permanent.
If cuts are permanent, then how will public schools get better and become more competitive? No entity, public or private, ever cuts their way to success. And, if tax receipts are less than projected, then other public programs could be cut to fulfill the obligations of this legislation.
Third, parochial schools receive no federal funding under No Child Left Behind. They do not need to comply with those policies. The more responsible schools will test their students anyway; they need the tuition and have a reputation to protect with parents, colleges and schools in the higher grades.
However, how do we know that the schools with more modest budgets are capable of the same quality as the better endowed schools?
Fourth, the bill states applies to students "eligible" to attend a failing school who meet an income guideline. Does eligible mean that the student must live in the neighborhood around the failing school, or within anyplace in the district?
In some cases, the district will have some passing schools and some failing schools. Should a student who has the option of transfer to a passing school within the same district be allowed to receive a scholarship to leave the district? Would that be fair to a student who had no public options?
Fifth, and most important. What evidence is there that parochial schools that would be on the brink of closing without the scholarship program can manage their fiscal affairs better than the public schools?
This is exceptionally important, because $24 million per class in year one is more than $24 million per class in year five. The subsidy decreases every year for each class.
A parochial school that accepts these students must raise money to cover annual cost increases; the state will not allow them to charge tuition to scholarship students in later years. Can these schools raise sufficient funds and expand their endowments to allow them to retain these students while maintaining a quality education?
I would be very concerned if a parochial school near financial failure received a government-supported, though not government-funded, subsidy over public schools.
Tuesday, May 4, 2010
Remembering Kent State
Today is the 40th anniversary of the shooting at Kent State University. On May 4, 1970, four students were shot and killed within thirteen seconds by 28 National Guardsmen who fired more than sixty shots into a crowd. Nine other students were wounded, one paralyzed for the rest of his life.
I've had a special interest in Kent State for four years. I researched the shooting as part of my work in writing my novel, Defending College Heights. Two accounts of Kent State, James Michener's Kent State and Phillip Caputo's Thirteen Secondswere among the most useful. I've placed links to these books, as well as my own, at the bottom of the post.
Today's USA Today has a very thorough news account of the shooting as well as commemorations of the event and contrasts between the university community then and now. Students today, according to the story, are less concerned about America's ongoing military conflicts than about the impacts of the tsunami in Haiti. Perfectly understandable; there is no draft and there is no pressure upon them to serve.
Two things bother me about this story.
One, the university applied to add the sight of the shooting to the National Register of Historic Places, and the application was approved by the U.S. Department of the Interior, including trail markers and an audio walking tour led by civil rights activist Julian Bond. There is also a visitor's center in planning stages.
There are already many memorials to the shooting on campus, and there should be, especially in the names of the students who were killed or seriously injured. However, Kent State was not a war. It was an act of aggression by the National Guard, supported by state government, against a student body who did not believe that soldiers would do what soldiers do. It was also an act that could have been avoided had the guards not fired real bullets. This was not a battle carefully planned by brilliant military minds.
I'm sure that James Rhodes, then the Republican governor of Ohio, meant for the guards to keep the peace, not to shoot to kill. I'm not so sure that I would want the venue to be hallowed ground much like a Civil War battlefield. Kent State is not Gettysburg where there are numerous tributes to state militia who served in battle and set hours where people may view them. Kent State is a wide-open college campus, not a national military park.
The USA Today story reported that enrollments at Kent State dropped twenty percent, and remained at that level for seventeen years. No doubt, parents did not want to send their children to a school where students had been shot, or worried about their children had they chosen Kent State. I wonder how those parents would feel about memorializing a murder like a military battle.
The second thing that bothered me was a comment by the president of the campus Young Republicans. He said that there was a connection between the student protest of 1970 and Tea Party activism today because "they're both grass roots movements."
That may be true. However, the campus protesters of 1970 demonstrated against conservative state governors. James Rhodes was a Republican who called the students "the worst type of people that we harbor in America." Ronald Reagan took office at the peak of campus protest. When told that the college students were the future, Reagan, according to biographer Lou Cannon, said: "I'll sell my bonds."
The Tea Partiers do not believe that past governors such as Reagan and Rhodes went far enough. They are not interested in celebrating student activism. They do not care that students have gained considerable voice in university communities such as Kent State. That voice is too liberal,they say,and it should be silenced.
I could not see young people who need government financial support to pay education becoming Tea Partiers. Why would they want to join a movement that would prefer to take that support away in the name of lower taxes? Most of all, why would they support politicians they might have protested over four decades ago?
I've had a special interest in Kent State for four years. I researched the shooting as part of my work in writing my novel, Defending College Heights. Two accounts of Kent State, James Michener's Kent State and Phillip Caputo's Thirteen Secondswere among the most useful. I've placed links to these books, as well as my own, at the bottom of the post.
Today's USA Today has a very thorough news account of the shooting as well as commemorations of the event and contrasts between the university community then and now. Students today, according to the story, are less concerned about America's ongoing military conflicts than about the impacts of the tsunami in Haiti. Perfectly understandable; there is no draft and there is no pressure upon them to serve.
Two things bother me about this story.
One, the university applied to add the sight of the shooting to the National Register of Historic Places, and the application was approved by the U.S. Department of the Interior, including trail markers and an audio walking tour led by civil rights activist Julian Bond. There is also a visitor's center in planning stages.
There are already many memorials to the shooting on campus, and there should be, especially in the names of the students who were killed or seriously injured. However, Kent State was not a war. It was an act of aggression by the National Guard, supported by state government, against a student body who did not believe that soldiers would do what soldiers do. It was also an act that could have been avoided had the guards not fired real bullets. This was not a battle carefully planned by brilliant military minds.
I'm sure that James Rhodes, then the Republican governor of Ohio, meant for the guards to keep the peace, not to shoot to kill. I'm not so sure that I would want the venue to be hallowed ground much like a Civil War battlefield. Kent State is not Gettysburg where there are numerous tributes to state militia who served in battle and set hours where people may view them. Kent State is a wide-open college campus, not a national military park.
The USA Today story reported that enrollments at Kent State dropped twenty percent, and remained at that level for seventeen years. No doubt, parents did not want to send their children to a school where students had been shot, or worried about their children had they chosen Kent State. I wonder how those parents would feel about memorializing a murder like a military battle.
The second thing that bothered me was a comment by the president of the campus Young Republicans. He said that there was a connection between the student protest of 1970 and Tea Party activism today because "they're both grass roots movements."
That may be true. However, the campus protesters of 1970 demonstrated against conservative state governors. James Rhodes was a Republican who called the students "the worst type of people that we harbor in America." Ronald Reagan took office at the peak of campus protest. When told that the college students were the future, Reagan, according to biographer Lou Cannon, said: "I'll sell my bonds."
The Tea Partiers do not believe that past governors such as Reagan and Rhodes went far enough. They are not interested in celebrating student activism. They do not care that students have gained considerable voice in university communities such as Kent State. That voice is too liberal,they say,and it should be silenced.
I could not see young people who need government financial support to pay education becoming Tea Partiers. Why would they want to join a movement that would prefer to take that support away in the name of lower taxes? Most of all, why would they support politicians they might have protested over four decades ago?
Monday, May 3, 2010
Myron Rolle Will Follow Two Rhodes Scholars to NFL Success
Last week, I wrote a post about Oklahoma State wide receiver Dez Bryant. While probably one of the best natural athletes in this season's NFL rookie class, Bryant did not seem like someone who cared about achieving academic distinction; he left college without completing his junior year.
Today, I'd like to talk about the other extreme, Florida State safety Myron Rolle. Drafted in the sixth round by the Tennessee Titans, Rolle is attempting to play professional football after being away from the game for a full year.
He too, like Bryant, left college with eligibility remaining. But he had earned his college degree in two and a half years, as well as a master's degree. He chose to skip his senior year--and become a Rhodes Scholar at Oxford University in the U.K.
As I followed the news up to the draft, I was fascinated by the news coverage surrounding Rolle. He played his high school football at the private Hun School, not far from where I live in New Jersey, and he was considered one of the best players in the country.
I had hoped he would attend an institution with a stronger academic reputation than Florida State, but Rolle told the media at the time that his athletic hero had been Deion Sanders, the great Florida State corner. Why begrudge a teenager who wants to play on the same field as his sports hero? Especially after he succeeded in academics and athletics.
But commentators and sports writers talked of Rolle's interviews with teams as if the NFL community was concerned that the man did not have football as his top priority. I understand why: professional football has become a year-round job.
If you're not getting ready to play the game, your mind and body is getting into football shape. But if Myron Rolle was able to juggle school and sports so successfully as a student,then why would he be less successful as a pro? Part of success is discipline.Myron Rolle must have that in spades. He should no problem keeping priorities straight.
I did a search to see if there have been other Rhodes Scholars in the NFL. I've found at least two. Byron "Whizzer" White, running back from the University of Colorado and quarterback Pat Haden from Southern Cal.
Unlike Rolle, White played a year of pro football before accepting the Rhodes. The fourth player taken in the 1938 NFL draft by the Pittsburgh Steelers, White led the league in rushing during his rookie year. After returning, he played for the Detroit Lions, with no less success.
White played only two more seasons, then he entered the U.S. Navy at the onset of World War II, serving as an intelligence officer. After his discharge, he enrolled at Yale Law School. In 1961, he was appointed an Associate Justice to the U.S. Supreme Court by President John F. Kennedy. Since 1966, the NFL Man of the Year award has been named after Justice White.
Pat Haden's story is more similar to Rolle's. His desire to pursue the Rhodes led NFL teams to wait until the seventh round to draft him in 1975. Like White, he played one season of pro football before study aboard. Only he played outside of the NFL for the World Football League Southern California Sun; they played in the spring and summer while the NFL played in the fall. The league folded after thirteen games, with Haden as the third leading passer.
After his Rhodes year, Haden returned to pro football as the third quarterback on the Los Angeles Rams. He became the starter in the fifth game of the 1976 season and led the Rams to three consecutive division titles, though they never won a championship. In 1979, he broke a finger and watched his back-up Vince Ferragamo, an Academic All-American at Nebraska, lead the Rams to the Super Bowl. In 1981, injured again, Haden retired. He later became a lawyer and a broadcaster; today, he is also a venture capitalist.
Neither White nor Haden had long careers, but that was not due to the year off at Oxford. They both succeeded in pro football in the first seasons after they returned, and they went on to greater success.
Myron Rolle might have been subject to the same anti-intellectual biases that befell Pat Haden, but pro football is a very different game than it was in the 1930's, the 1940's, the 1970's or the 1980's. Although the rosters are larger, there are fewer jobs for rookie draft picks and free agents. The pay is too good for marginal veterans, players with three or more years of service, to leave the game.
Not that money will be a problem for Rolle. Last season, running back Bernard Scott, the Cincinnati Bengals second sixth round pick signed a four year contract worth $1.75 million. He made $310,000 during his rookie year and will made $395,000 in 2010. Rolle was a more highly regarded player coming out of college than Scott.
As long as Myron Rolle stays healthy, he will not only make his team; he will likely outplay his original contract. And he will leave pro football with more than enough saved for medical school or anything else he wants to do.
Today, I'd like to talk about the other extreme, Florida State safety Myron Rolle. Drafted in the sixth round by the Tennessee Titans, Rolle is attempting to play professional football after being away from the game for a full year.
He too, like Bryant, left college with eligibility remaining. But he had earned his college degree in two and a half years, as well as a master's degree. He chose to skip his senior year--and become a Rhodes Scholar at Oxford University in the U.K.
As I followed the news up to the draft, I was fascinated by the news coverage surrounding Rolle. He played his high school football at the private Hun School, not far from where I live in New Jersey, and he was considered one of the best players in the country.
I had hoped he would attend an institution with a stronger academic reputation than Florida State, but Rolle told the media at the time that his athletic hero had been Deion Sanders, the great Florida State corner. Why begrudge a teenager who wants to play on the same field as his sports hero? Especially after he succeeded in academics and athletics.
But commentators and sports writers talked of Rolle's interviews with teams as if the NFL community was concerned that the man did not have football as his top priority. I understand why: professional football has become a year-round job.
If you're not getting ready to play the game, your mind and body is getting into football shape. But if Myron Rolle was able to juggle school and sports so successfully as a student,then why would he be less successful as a pro? Part of success is discipline.Myron Rolle must have that in spades. He should no problem keeping priorities straight.
I did a search to see if there have been other Rhodes Scholars in the NFL. I've found at least two. Byron "Whizzer" White, running back from the University of Colorado and quarterback Pat Haden from Southern Cal.
Unlike Rolle, White played a year of pro football before accepting the Rhodes. The fourth player taken in the 1938 NFL draft by the Pittsburgh Steelers, White led the league in rushing during his rookie year. After returning, he played for the Detroit Lions, with no less success.
White played only two more seasons, then he entered the U.S. Navy at the onset of World War II, serving as an intelligence officer. After his discharge, he enrolled at Yale Law School. In 1961, he was appointed an Associate Justice to the U.S. Supreme Court by President John F. Kennedy. Since 1966, the NFL Man of the Year award has been named after Justice White.
Pat Haden's story is more similar to Rolle's. His desire to pursue the Rhodes led NFL teams to wait until the seventh round to draft him in 1975. Like White, he played one season of pro football before study aboard. Only he played outside of the NFL for the World Football League Southern California Sun; they played in the spring and summer while the NFL played in the fall. The league folded after thirteen games, with Haden as the third leading passer.
After his Rhodes year, Haden returned to pro football as the third quarterback on the Los Angeles Rams. He became the starter in the fifth game of the 1976 season and led the Rams to three consecutive division titles, though they never won a championship. In 1979, he broke a finger and watched his back-up Vince Ferragamo, an Academic All-American at Nebraska, lead the Rams to the Super Bowl. In 1981, injured again, Haden retired. He later became a lawyer and a broadcaster; today, he is also a venture capitalist.
Neither White nor Haden had long careers, but that was not due to the year off at Oxford. They both succeeded in pro football in the first seasons after they returned, and they went on to greater success.
Myron Rolle might have been subject to the same anti-intellectual biases that befell Pat Haden, but pro football is a very different game than it was in the 1930's, the 1940's, the 1970's or the 1980's. Although the rosters are larger, there are fewer jobs for rookie draft picks and free agents. The pay is too good for marginal veterans, players with three or more years of service, to leave the game.
Not that money will be a problem for Rolle. Last season, running back Bernard Scott, the Cincinnati Bengals second sixth round pick signed a four year contract worth $1.75 million. He made $310,000 during his rookie year and will made $395,000 in 2010. Rolle was a more highly regarded player coming out of college than Scott.
As long as Myron Rolle stays healthy, he will not only make his team; he will likely outplay his original contract. And he will leave pro football with more than enough saved for medical school or anything else he wants to do.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)