Some Economists, and Bill Gates, Agree With Duncan: Stop Degree Bonuses for Teachers

Will someone please tell me when Bill Gates became an expert on education issues and policy? I guess he must have an advanced degree in….oh, wait, that’s right, he DROPPED OUT of college before finishing his degree. So naturally, he must know much, much more about the issues facing education, due to his vast experiences as an educator and policy analyst….What a load of crap.

Mr. Gates and Mr. Duncan do not value education – that should be obvious from their statements. How goofy to imply that they would prefer lesser educated teachers. Unless one considers that this is just one more step in the Billionaire Boys Club plan to completely de-professionalize and dismantle the teaching profession. And don’t just sit there smugly, professors – they will be coming after universities next. I think people like this fear those who are more educated than they are and feel insecure and inferior due to their lack of knowledge.

Just because Mr. Gates got lucky and landed a ton of money does not entitle him to set the agenda for public policy, especially education. One must ponder the reasons behind his actions. Possibly, because MS Inc. stands to make a gazillion more dollars from “educational” software packages designed to replace classroom teachers? Gates has stated in interviews and speeches that he hopes to identify the “best” teachers (whatever that means in his mind), video them, and then stream that video to every student in the country, “saving” lots of money for school districts. It’s glaringly obvious that this man has NO IDEA how students learn, or what motivates them, or what works and does not work in a classroom of adolescents. Assuming that these kids will just be self-motivated to learn is nuts. If they were self-motivated, states would not have mandatory attendance laws and truancy laws on the books. And the world would be filled with rainbows and flowers.

Mr. Gates, leave education to the educators. If you truly consider yourself to be a philanthropist, then act as one – otherwise, keep your money, and your ridiculous notions, to yourself.

This proposal makes a lot of common sense. I have had plenty of teachers who have advanced degrees in the past, and I can safely say that their teaching effectiveness is not any more superior than their colleagues who have only a bachelor degree. Just because our current cultural climate favors credentialism, it does not automatically mean that it is the best practice for our children. Also, what does having an advanced degree really mean anyway? You can get an advanced degree online these days easily. What does that really prove?

Perhaps 22072131 has a point in this matter regarding some of Gate’s motivations. There has been a great incursion of corporate learning products coming into both academe and the public schools. It may be of some service but often these things are quite basic, and may unnecessarily regiment education.

However as wpgrey astutely noted that part of the problem might be related to the type of degree rather than the presence of an additional degree. It might serve students better if degrees for teachers contained more coursework in the subject matter to be taught rather than more layering of teaching theories. Teacher education courses have some merit, but often these to leave the classroom teacher short of knowledge about the actual subject matter they will be teaching. And no teachers guide, or other publishers or corporate multi-media package can compensate for four years (+masters) of misdirected studies. And anyway since the end purpose of these programs is licensure, moving that coursework into subject specialities might also encourage teacher licensure to be less directed to more than just the education majors. That just might increase and improve the pool from which schools can draw new teachers.
More education would be a asset to our teachers and they should be paid more for that initiative. But perhaps that should be directed to subject matter specialities rather than more academic worship at the altar of such as Piaget.

@bradweiner “For all of the critics, you too can have a say when you put a few billion on the table.”

Remarkably like our political process!

My field, nursing, grapples with the same issue — but from a different perspective. Traditional practice is for nurses to NOT receive greater compensation for advanced degrees or certifications. The argument has always been, “You are paid for the work you do, not for the courses you took 10 years ago. If you do the same work, you get the same pay.”

As there have been few rewards for those who pursued higher academic degrees and/or specialty certifications, most nurses don’t invest in them (and in some cases, have learned not to value higher education.) However in recent years, there has been a push to reward nurses with higher education. Nurses working toward this goal have been doing research in an effort to show that things such as higher education, continuing education, and specialty certification are related to measurable improvements in practice. We realize that we can’t expect to be simply “handed the money” unless we can show that we bring more value to our employers when we bring our advanced educations. We need to show that link.

Perhaps educators interested in preserving the payscales that reward advanced education should look at the struggles of the nursing profession to achieve recongition for higher education. It might give some things to think about — in terms of both looking at the effects on a profession of NOT encouraging higher education, and in the needed research efforts to establish the benefits of higher levels of education for nurses and teachers.

Here’s the problem: Too many teachers take a few classes to “pick up” a master’s degree from a fluff program in a fluff school (hey, I didn’t say, “the School of Education”!) at a mediocre college (especially a for-profit) that gets them an automatic raise without improving their performance as teachers.

Here’s the underlying problem: Nobody’s come up with a with a way acceptable to either the education establishment or the teachers’ unions to compensate teachers–who obviously vary tremendously, individually, in quality–on their individual merits. So we’re left with the likes of such merit-blind policies as “Master’s degree–check the box; get a raise–check the box.”

I don’t have a solution, but the umbrage taken by teachers, their unions, and the education establishment at the likes of outsiders such as Bill Gates siding with Arne Duncan on the master’s degree issue rather resembles the umbrage taken by police forces at the prospect of civilian review boards, by the military at objections to expensive weapons systems, by the Church at non-ecclesiastical courts prosecuting child abuse by clergy, by Wall Street at proposed checks on executive compensation, etc.

goxewu,

For once I think you are spot on.

Goxewu – my dear, you nailed that one. I agree.

Now, I will say what nobody wants to say. The “for profit” online education system is at least 80% rubbish. We must come up with a serious evaluation system that works so that education at different schools can be roughly compared.

This is similar to the issues with PhD degrees from quite a few bricks and mortar schools overseas. In the vast majority of cases, those PhD degrees are equivalent to maybe 1/2 of a masters, if that. I say the same or less applies to most online “universities”.

And – I say that as someone who got my undergrad degree at a combination of community college, major university and one of the old-style non-residential correspondence universities. What I did in the latter to finish was much different, and harder than my classroom studies. I’ve taken a look at what most online universities do and they aren’t 1/10th what bricks and mortar are.

Not a bad idea, I imagine in some school districts the quality of education would go up.

As a K-12 teacher with an MS.Ed (and no stipend from my private school) I find this an interesting discussion. Some of the negative comments are spot on, but you omit one of the driving reasons teachers take these “fluff” courses: recertification. If your 5-year license to teach is coming up for renewal and it requires at least 6 grad credits in EITHER your discipline or your area of teaching, you will be looking through the catalog with an eagle eye. Many academic disciplines offer few to no classes that meet at times suited to a teacher’s schedule (remember, many of us can’t leave campus before 4:00). On the other hand, grad classes in Teacher Ed are routinely set to teaching schedules–and are frequently offered at a discounted tuition rate. In short, it’s never as simple as it seems, alas.

Hi tech_prof! Wonderful to hear that you actually looked at my post. What I do not see is how my stating facts (Mr. Gates has no degree, for example) can be construed as a chldish, personal attack. And where did I make any negative comments about Mr. Gates’s intellect? I did not.

There is far more at stake here than a simple difference of opinion between my views on public education and those of Mr. Duncan and Mr. Gates. Their plans for education are not the right ones. Larger class sizes? Less educated teachers? Cutting teacher benefits and salaries – which are SO generous and rich now? How can these ideas possibly bring about positive improvements? They cannot.

Here’s a better plan: require at least a Masters in the teacher’s discpline, limit the student/teacher ratio to no more than 15:1, and let’s increase teacher pay to at least what a beginning attorney is paid.

You say I did not pioneer a company and set up a global monopoly. Quite true. that has never been my aprofessional ambition. I wanted to teach, to earn those useless advnaced degrees, be a life-long scholar, and all I ask is the freedom to teach without outside interefernce from those who have NOT dedicated their careers and lives to these pursuits. Despite your contention, I did not and do not presume to tell Microsoft how to run their business – I am not qualified to do so. And that is the difference. I know what my expertise is, and work to improve it and practice it. Others should do the same. That’s all I expect – a little respect. No one should feel entitled to dictate public policy just because they are wealthy. That is the antithesis of principles upon which our republic was founded.

And say, perhaps you would like to have a BA in sociology or the humanities in charge of the CDC, or setting standards for chemistry lab practices, or setting standards for nuclear plants? Oh, that person would not be qualified. I see now.

The critics may have a somewhat valid point. The value of an advanced degree for a public school teacher, relative to improved teaching, may be small as quite frequently the advanced degrees are in educational administration, curriculum development, or some other area not directly related to the topic in which they instruct. One would not expect to increase understanding of ones teaching content area, or teaching performance, by studying another topic area.

Could education be the only field where underpaid faculty are REQUIRED to pay thousands of dollars a year for graduate credits just to KEEP THEIR JOBS? Being a teacher is expensive!

I am an award winning educator who has luckily been awarded fellowships and scholarships to attend ivy league schools for my graduate credit but am I interested in a graduate degree? Not at all. I don’t have the time and I certainly don’t have the money.

I’m interested in life long learning that crosses curriculum and feeds my soul. You don’t get that in a graduate degree program. They tend to specialize and deplete. When I’m intellectually excited and nourished, my students benefit. So I’m always on the lookout for summer fellowships that extend and enrich my knowledge base. When I’m happy, my students are happy. It’s that easy.

I know I am only one teacher, but my advanced degree made strong and lasting improvements to my teaching.

I guess I am amazed that in a nation that doesn’t blink at paying professional athletes multi-million dollar contracts for time limited skills that do not transfer into the real world ( except maybe on ESPN), we quibble about a teacher finding a way to make a little bit more to live on by extending their education. I work every day with dedicated teachers who pay out of their own pockets to help their students,and work work all hours of the night to try to make their courses more relevant. And then I cry when some making $20-30k a year are cut because the school systems are not being supported as they need to be. The only really overpaid people in education tend to be the administrators and some in the university systems who are living off of research reputations rather than teaching skills. For the rest of those out there, let there be bonuses for advancing themselves. The reason for Educational administration degrees is that they are the ONLY route for some teachers to better themselves financially. Instead of cutting off the opportunities, we need to have more advanced degrees that are subject and teaching related.

Oh, dear. Three grammatical and spelling errors in a short piece, and teaching composition!

I found three boo-boos. The “semester started bad” (badly). “Which led to me (my) misappropriating time” and “in verbal thanks, and more important (ly).” Is there an editor in the house?

And what you term as grammatically incorrect, I term as being mostly matters of preference – though I do agree that it should be the “semester started badly”. Regardless, if this guy was a nurse, I’d love to hire him as an adjunct – his goal – and his joy – is that students learn! That’s what it should be about – and quite frankly, I’m not always sure that full-timers get that!

This is true – though he didn’t say he was happy – he simply said he liked having a positive impact and he believes that he does have a positive impact.

It shouldn’t be “Three grammatical and spelling errors….” They aren’t errors in grammar and spelling. But, then again, “three grammatical or spelling errors” doesn’t sound right either. I would’ve stuck with just “Three grammatical errors….”

The adjuncts that I know who are still teaching after a couple years fall into five camps:

1 – those who do it because of fear of quitting and thinking that their degrees have been a waste of time
2 – those who are incapable of other types of work (e.g. ideologues who refuse to work for those “evil” corporations or governments)
3 – those who have tried to look for other work but have failed (sometimes this reason is conflated with #2)
4 – those who believe that working conditions are about to get a lot better for adjuncts, and are willing to “hang in there’ until then
5 – those who live paycheck to paycheck and do not have the time or resources to look for other work

What myth? There are plenty of adjuncts who teach because they enjoy it. A lot of them are professionals who see adjunct work as a way to give something back to society. Others, like the author of this piece, started it to pick up some extra cash and found that they liked it enough to do it on a long term basis. They’re not mythical — they’re a significant part of the adjunct workforce in academia, and it’s entirely appropriate for their experience to be part of the discussion.

I complete agree. As an elementary school teacher turned stay-at-home mom, I’m excited for the opportunity to work as an Online Adjunct Teaching Assistant. This position offers me the balance I need and want given my level of education and experience. Yes, I need to make money, but the experience will be a stepping stone towards other opportunites. Who knows? I’m may be very content as the perpetual adjunct.

My book club is currently reading The Help, and my intermediate ESL class is using Having Our Say: The Delany Sisters’ First Hundred Years as its text. Both books, in varying degrees, consider the myth of the happy mammy. Bessie and Sadie Delany, whose father was born into slavery, and all of whose siblings (there were ten children in the family) were college graduates and became professionals in their fields, make very clear how proud they are of never having worked as domestics in white families. The women in The Help may love the white children they raise, but they do not love the working conditions: the poor pay, the lack of job security, the absence of health insurance or retirement savings, the lack of respect. When the picture stops with the loving mammy and ignores the rest, we have a convenient but finally very distorted myth.

In the same way, most if not all of the 1,000,000 of us who teach contingently, whether we are TAs or have rolling long-term, full-time non-tenure-track contracts or fall somewhere in between, do so because of the satisfaction we get from teaching. For some of us, one class is all that we want, and the lack of parity, health insurance, retirement, and respect are irrelevant. The problem for me is that every time we say that we teach because we love it, others find it easy and convenient to ignore our second-class working conditions. It is not a myth that many adjuncts are happy, just as it was not a myth that many mammies loved their white charges. However, the myth becomes problematic when we paint the picture that the situation of those of us whose spouses or other jobs provide health insurance is indeed the situation of all of us or that the choice to teach just once class was ours.

The myth of the happy adjunct becomes problematic for the single parent unable to rely on the same teaching load from semester to semester who still needs to feed and clothe the children regardless of the uncertainty of the academic marketplace. It is problematic for the woman who doesn’t get her mammogram because she has no health insurance and then doesn’t find out in a timely fashion that she has breast cancer. It is problematic for the man who teaches three classes at three different schools because that is the only way he can make ends meet. Every time we say, or allow our colleagues to say how much we love teaching without mentioning all the rest, we are contributing to the myth of the happy adjunct and to the perpetuation of unfair and untenable working conditions.

Betsy Smith
Adjunct Professor of ESL
Cape Cod Community College

I am still an adjunct because
1. I still love teaching
2. The next nearest community college is 30 miles away
3. Conditions are improving (pay, retirement, sick leave, adquate work space, respect)
Yes I helped directly
4. I see up to 35+ students per class (between 65 and 110 each quarter)
5. My husband has a good job
6. Other work in town actually pays either less or if about the same pay more it requires a 50 week work year then and weekends, I have to work by a shedule dictated to me…

The mammy analogy came to mind because of the two books that I mentioned that I just happened to be reading right now. The main point is that when we allow the employer to sift through our messages and just choose the ones in which we say that we love what we are doing without paying any attention to all of the others that detail our complaints, we make it difficult, if not impossible, to effect positive change. The president of my institution insists, as do many who participate in these conversations, that contingent faculty are not exploited, that if we were not happy, we would find other jobs. It ain’t always that easy, especially in a climate that, over the past three decades, has consistently turned full-time tenure-track positions into 1,000,000 precarious contingent ones. This is damaging not only to those who, having prepared over many years for an academic career, now find themselves shut out, but also to our students and our full-time tenured colleagues.

Whether we choose to teach only one course or have to teach multiple courses at multiple schools, and totally apart from how much we love teaching, we should receive equal pay for equal work and benefits that allow us to get a mammogram, or take a sick day if we’re ill, or bereavement leave if a family member dies, or retire without qualifying for food stamps. We deserve dignity and respect for the incredible work that we do, frequently under far-from-ideal conditions.

Betsy Smith

I’m still an adjunct because:
I like teaching;
Family reasons.
But I recognize that adjuncts need to be paid as professionals with longer contracts. It’s important to maintain both sides of the discussion, every time, I think, or we lose professional credibility and hope for more equitable contracts. Most adjuncts teach because they like the work, but it’s usually not sustainable.
I think there’s an initial euphoria, which the author describes, but as the years go on, I’d like to see a stronger commitment to real salaries.

Well, I used to teach on an adjunct basis to supplement the meager income from my law office. Now, in retirement, I use my adjunct teaching (now on-line only) to supplement my meager income from Social Security and — even more importantly — to keep me from sufferig “Blue Screen Death”. I cannot imagine being without my students !

(Other retirees reading this comment will know EXACTLY what I am talking about. Some of my non-adjunct friends are demonstrably flabbier — intellectually, anyway — than I am, and I think I know why)

Full-time faculty members can be as snarky as they want about all this. I don’t care.

Wow! I can’t believe how rude some of you are being! I started out as an adjunct prof many years ago as a way to earn money in grad school. The teaching bug bit me and I am still here 23 years later – with 19 more to go! Ive been in all of the faculty positions that I think that there are- adjunct, ft temporatry, FT. When I retire I am already planning on being an adjunct professor. I can’t imagine how sad I would be if I could not be an adjunct. Or how my brain would turn to mush!
I have taught part time for all of the right and all of the wrong reasons- need for money, need for money ,need for money being number one. Not because of incompetence mind you but in Psychology its a norm to go 9 years part-time before your first full time job.
So, why am I an adjunct? Well I hate to say it, but I am an adjunct right now, as well as a FT, because I like the extra income. You can’t get that kind of pay for that kind of work anywhere else. But, in future, I will be an adjunct for what I hope are all the right reasons- I love teaching, my students, and keeping an active inquiring mind!

40′s a lot. In my defense, it is composition, so 25 freshman papers, five times a semester (per course) is still a lot. And it’s the same amount of students as tenured and tt profs at BRCC teach in the same courses. It almost seems like you’re suggesting you have more students per course because you’re a tenured full professor. I’ve never heard of that (for the same course, anyway).

I was recently severed (aka “‘offered’ early retirement”) after a long and productive research career in big pharma. After three semesters of adjunct teaching, perhaps you’ll say I’m still in the euphoric stage. But since I’m living the last half of my life, I truly enjoy the opportunities to “give back” — especially to the students, but also to the university. Yes, I also agree we should fight for better compensation and working conditions. The compensation is absurdly low compared to the qualifications, responsibility and hours of work the position requires.

@Isaac – I really liked your article and could give a sh*% that you misspelled or used the wrong tense for some words! OMG – you asked a question but instead your writing was attacked! Humans make grammatical errors – even adjuncts :)

Why I remain an Adjunct:
1) I LOVE what I do!
2) One of the 3 university’s I teach for pays what the Chronicle says an adjunct should be paid!
3) I see up to 150+ students per semester between 3 universities! So the newness of each set drives me crazy but I couldn’t live without it :)

4) My Bachelors was a waste of time and my Masters afforded me the great opportunity to teach when I left the corporate and non-profit world! I’m not looking back :)

5) I think conditions for adjuncts will change depending upon the institution! I’d like to think of adjuncts as a movement but we have no representation!

6) Teaching online allows me to spend time with my toddlers!
7) I also teach on campus! One campus is less than 20 miles from my home and the other, I can ride a bike or city bus to!

8) Teaching has expanded my knowledge and skills!
9) I learn a lot from other adjuncts too so until conditions for adjuncts improve, I plan to do other things (publish articles, freelance, presentations, etc.).

10) The work days and hours are controlled by me!

Thanks Isaac :)

I am an adjunct because we are two in academia. My husband is in a tenure-track position and I teach where he teaches. I am lucky to have a job since there are no colleges around nor other jobs, beyond the fact that I love teaching. At the moment we do not have alternatives beyond trying the job-market every year. I do not feel mythic, I feel exploited! I am a “better” bargain than my husband for the school…

That was just awesome! Respect!

I have been an adjunct and tutor at a two-year city college in Chicago since the fall of 1996, almost 15 years. Why do I put up with it? Because as Isaac Sweeney wrote in his article, I love to teach. And even though I am not called a full-time adjunct, that is precisely what I am with three to four courses (9 to 12 credit hour courses) per fall and spring semesters plus one or two three credit hour courses in the summer, and depending on my course load and need for supplemental income, I tutor between 10 and 15 hours a week. I could tutor more hours, but then I’m afraid I’d turn into a tattered old wet blanket if I were to take on anymore hours in tutoring than I absolutely must. I’m treated pretty well at the College and the Unions have been good for me for the most part. The pay sucks, but I am making a living nonetheless and that’s because I love to teach. In other words, fellow adjunct colleagues and full-time tenured colleagues, because I feel called to teach, there isn’t much anyone could do or not do for or against me to push me out of being and continuing to become more and more of an educator. Sometimes being obstinate is a virtue even if we never find full-time tenured-track positions. Oh, I’m not at all saying we shouldn’t try! Of course, we should if that is what we want, but for me, even if I never become F T T-T professor, I will always be grateful that I have made it as far as I have in the incredibly demanding and deeply meaningful profession of a teacher. Yet, keep on keeping on dear colleagues! Keep on keeping on as long as we are teaching in some capacity, there is still more journey-work to be done. Blessings, Ilene

I truly believe in freedom of speech, but I also honestly believe that tbd489′s comment about Mr. Sweeney’s article on being an adjunct teacher is entirely missing his point. Who is the one who is not smart enough to figure out how much a teacher can love to teach? It becomes more than love and caring. It becomes an obligation! So, don’t worry ’bout no pigeons. The comparison is far too weak for what I believe you are sharing with your readers Mr. Sweeney, and I thank you, truly thank you for your brave, honest, and passionate words about being an educator, a teacher, a mentor, a guide from ignorance to enlightenment. . . .

Would you add those who have retired and want to get back into higher ed? I taught full time at the university level for about 25 years. Due to cut backs and a refusal to do adjunct work because I had to make a decent living,I became certified to teach K-12 and have been pretty miserable the past seven years. Can’t wait to get bck into higher ed even as an adjunct.