A number of LYSers responded to the series of posts I wrote on
7/8, 7/9, and 7/10/2014: “My Texas
School Plan – An Open Letter to the Candidates From Both Parties.” The comments that were submitted were
similar to the following:
“SC,
Great post! I have forwarded it to my Representative. We’ll see if he/she does anything.”
And,
“SC,
Please post all three blog posts as a single article so it will
be easier to share.”
Thank you to everyone who wrote in and the combined
re-print is below.
Dear Candidate:
I’m not running for office, but I am a civic minded,
reasonable, professional educator. Due to my devotion to the profession and to
the state I offer to you, our candidates who are running for public office, a primer
on effective schools.
Here are the pertinent take-a-ways from the countries
that have students who outperform ours on a regular basis.
1. You
can significantly increase the quality of candidates entering the teaching
profession. The Finland model
2.
You can significantly increase the quality of teacher training and preparation
programs. The Finland model
3. You
can pay teachers a professional salary. The Finland model
4. You
can have clear, deep curriculum standards that schools are required to teach. The
Finland and Poland model
5.
You can increase the stakes on the high school exit exams. The South Korea
Model
6. You
can increase the number of hours and days students devote to academics and
school. The South Korea model
7.
You can worry less about how students feel and worry more about student
performance in areas that are correlated to an educated and economically
competitive populace. The South Korea model
8.
You can significantly delay the age at which students are tracked. The
Poland model
9.
You can ensure that schools that teach the hardest to reach student populations
get additional resources. The Finland and Poland model
The teachable moment from the above listed take-a-ways
is that it is exceedingly clear that pursuing an agenda of reducing public
education support thru vehicles that further segregate school are NOT the
answer.
In the public interest and courtesy to all of the
candidates for Governor, Lt. Governor, State Senator, and State Representative,
I present the Texas Model Education and Ensured Economic Prosperity Plan.
Feel free to discuss and use as if it is your own.
1.
Significantly increase the quality of candidates attempting to enter the
teaching profession. How?
A. Increase
ACT / SAT score requirements to enter state college of education
programs.
B. Increase
Alternative Certification Program entrance GPA requirements or require a
minimum GRE score to be accepted into the program.
2.
Significantly increase the quality of teacher training and preparation. How?
Teacher preparation programs should focus on both content and pedagogical
knowledge.
A. Which
means that a potential math teacher should graduate from a college of education
with a major in the content, a minor in pedagogy, and a full semester of
student teaching.
B. A
graduate from an Alternative Certification Program (ACP) should have a degree
related to the content area (a prerequisite) and the equivalent of 18 hours of
pedagogy course work. The student teaching for the ACP candidate can be
covered through supported and mentored classroom teaching while in the ACP
program.
3.
Pay teachers a professional salary. This goes hand-in-hand with
increasing the quality of the candidate pool for teaching. The more a candidate
brings to the table, the more options she has. If teacher salaries are
not comparable to the professional salaries of those with a similar education
then the best candidates will continue to shun education careers for better
economic options. So here is your professional salary scale for teachers.
A. $45,000
minimum salary for starting teachers.
B. $65,000
minimum salary for a core content teacher with 5-years experience, and 3-years
in the same district, and multiple certifications (example: K-8 reading and ESL
certifications).
C. $75,000
minimum salary for a core content teacher with 10-years experience, and 5-years
in the same district, and multiple certifications, and a Master’s degree.
D. $85,000
minimum salary for a core content teacher with 15-years experience, and 8-years
in the same district, and multiple certifications, and a Doctorate degree.
4.
Extend teacher contracts to 200 days. Do this concurrently with the increase in
minimum teacher salaries. Use the extra 20 days for training and extended
teaching options for struggling students.
5.
Have clear, deep curriculum standards that schools are required to teach. How?
We are close to this in Texas. The TEKS are a good start. They are just
too broad. Narrow the overall focus and increase the emphasis on critical
thinking.
6.
Mandate a maximum 21:1 student/teacher ratio in grade K-6 core content
courses. Mandate a maximum 24:1 student/teacher ratio in grade 7-11
STAAR/EOC courses.
7.
Increase the number of hours and days students devote to academics and school.
How? This is easier to do than you might think; it just requires two
simple (on paper) changes.
A. Move
all athletic based extra-curricular activities to outside the school day.
This ensures that all students engaged in athletics will receive an extra 45 to
90 minutes of academic instruction in either core content, fine arts, foreign
language or career based classes, EVERY DAY.
B. Move
all EOC / STAAR tests to May. This will encourage (force) schools to
teach the content deeper into the year.
C. Mandatory
(in lieu of retention) 3 to 5-week summer school session for all students who
failed either a STAAR/EOC test or a core content course.
8.
Increase the stakes on the high school exit exams. How? Now everyone immediately
thinks this is about increasing punitive measures and consequences. That
is the novice move. If bigger sticks were the answer, we wouldn’t have
our current agenda driven “Failing Schools” problem. No, we want carrots,
BIG FREAKIN’ CARROTS.
A. We
still keep some floor performance requirements. The diploma should
guarantee a level of basic skills. Right now there are 5 EOC tests. I
would prefer seven: two tests for English - ELA 2 and ELA 3; two tests for math
- Algebra 1 and either Geometry or Algebra II (student choice); two tests for
science - Biology and either Chemistry or Physics (student choice); one test
for Social Studies - U.S. History To graduate the student must score at least
60% on 4 of the 7 tests.
B.
We add a performance bonus for a defined level of commended results that could
work something like this. For every test the student scores at least an 85% on
there is an automatic scholarship that is awarded to the student, redeemable at
any state institution (2-year or 4-year) during the freshman and sophomore
years. Prorate the scholarship amount based on need, for example:
a.
Student qualifies for free lunch - $2,000 per exam, which represents a
potential scholarship amount of $14,000.
b.
Student qualifies for reduced lunch - $1,000 per exam, which represents a
potential scholarship amount of $7,000.
c. Student
not eligible for free/reduced lunch - $500 per exam, which represents a
potential scholarship amount of $3,500
Now all students have a significant incentive to take
higher-level courses and perform in those courses. And if parents want to opt
out their students from testing, they can do so for the advanced tests, but at
a potential economic loss (reduced scholarship eligibility).
Accountability still in place but success is driven
through the positives of earned scholarships and extended learning
opportunities for struggling students. Not school sanctions and mandatory
student retention.
9.
Implement the following Superintendent Salary Schedule:
A. District
with fewer than 500 students, Superintendent salary no higher than 1.5 times
the average teacher salary in the district.
B. District
with 501 – 1,000 students, Superintendent salary no more than 2 times the
average teacher salary in the district.
C. District
with 1,001 – 5,000 students, Superintendent salary no more than 2.5 times the
average teacher salary in the district.
D. District
with 5,001 – 15,000 students, Superintendent salary no more than 3 times the
average teacher salary in the district.
E. District
with 15,001 – 30,000 students, Superintendent salary no more than 3.5 times the
average teacher salary in the district.
F. District
with 30,001 – 70,000 students, Superintendent salary no more than 4 times the
average teacher salary in the district.
G. District
with more than 70,00 students, Superintendent salary no more than 5 times the
average teacher salary in the district.
10.
Make charter schools subject to the same teacher pay, class ratio and
superintendent pay standards as traditional public school districts.
Now we must tackle the really big problem, how to pay
for this ambitious plan. The plan I have presented will represent a significant
investment in our state. To adequately fund this investment will require
actual courage and statesmanship (statespersonship), as opposed to lip service
and pandering.
Some of the funding is already available. Through the
action of moving athletic and extra-curricular practices and activities to
outside of the school day, there will be a small, but not insignificant cost
savings. Because coaches and sponsors will actually teach content classes
all day, this will reduce staffing needs on secondary campuses. Just note that
you can’t sell this as being THE answer. It is not
The plan will cost and cost means taxes (but think
“investment”). I propose that the plan should be paid for with increased taxes
on the industries the represent a long-term hazard to the state. This
means industries that harvest non-renewable resources (oil, gas, and coal) and
hazardous industries (refining, chemical, waste storage/processing). Yes,
these industries are driving our economic recovery, but we must make sure that
we equip the state to prosper when the oil is gone and the chemicals are
leaching into the water table. These industries need to help educate a
bumper crop of engineers, scientists and doctors to solve the problems the
state will face twenty years from now.
Additionally, we need to increase the business tax. The
unspoken truth is that Texas businesses essentially get a free ride. It is the
consumer that is paying the biggest piece of the taxation pie. We must face the
fact that a No Tax policy on business is much more detrimental to the long-term
success of the state than Excessive Taxes. In Texas, we are not excessively
taxed. This is especially true for business, industry or those who own lots of
land.
The candidate that comes the closest to enacting the plan
I have proposed gets my vote. Thirty years ago, a coalition of Republican and
Democrat leaders tackled hard problems like these, and implemented tough
solutions like these. Current candidates step up and be a Texas Leader.
Channel your inner Bill Hobby, channel your inner Mark White, and channel your
inner Ross Perot. Show us your mettle.
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn...
- Call Jo at (832)
477-LEAD to order your campus set of “The Fundamental 5: The Formula for Quality Instruction.” Individual copies
available on Amazon.com! http://tinyurl.com/Fundamental5
- Now
at the Apple App Store: Fun 5 Timer (Fundamental 5 Delivery Tool); Fun 5 Plans
(Fundamental 5 Lesson Plan Tool)
- Upcoming Presentations: The Fundamental 5 National Summit (Keynote Presentation);
ASCD Annual Conference; TEPSA Summer Conference
- Follow
Sean Cain and LYS on www.Twitter.com/LYSNation and
like Lead Your School on Facebook
Posts
