First, there is a question of allocation of resources. Unfortunately, there will be a strong correlation between intelligence and ability to teach, although other factors are important. The excellent teacher might conceivably do equally well in elementary school and college. However, being more knowledgeable and better able to explain complicated things, and being more capable of original research, his talents are best used in college. Anyone can teach the multiplication tables. Teaching the integral calculus is tricky. Anyone can teach the parts of speech. Teaching students to appreciate Thackeray and Dostoyevsky is much more demanding.
Second, how does one judge the level at which salaries should be set? The main argument in favor of increasing teachers' salaries is that it would attract better people into the profession, a tacit acknowledgement that right now we are getting a less distinguished crop of teachers, nationally. On the other hand, almost all of the big problems currently associated with American education are a matter of distressed, mostly urban schools. Suburban schools generally do fine, as do schools with strong discipline, like inner city Catholic schools (do you think the nuns are that much better teachers?).
What drags the numbers down is the introduction of extraordinary stressors into certain schools: poor discipline, allowing certain students to disrupt school for all; too many immigrants concentrated in a district, straining resources; chaotic home lives, making it difficult to get the students to do the required studying at home; excessive flooding with drugs; and so on.
In cases like that, teachers are less of an issues than increasing discipline; treating immigrant education as a federal issue that must be separated statistically from the general population; providing extended school days and "safe havens" for students to study and get tutoring; better community policing in distressed neighborhoods, and the like...... |
