How much teachers get in each country

[Unkotare]

Sports have always been a part of education in the US, so it makes no sense to look there for a variable. Look for things that have changed, not things that haven't.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Some thoughts....first sports.
My son swam in High School and Middle School. I can say without the slightest hesitation that the discipline, dedication and work ethics he learned and developed swimming has done more for the success he has in college and an already growing career and he hasn't even graduated college yet!
As well as just how much better of a person he is because of his participation as a swimmer. He was a 3 time all state swimmer...his average day during a season that was almost the whole school year was arrive at school at 6:30am...and leave at 6:30pm. 5 days a week. Plus meets on Saturdays.
People all the time say how horrible that is, unfair, crazy....bullshit. While 9/10 of his peers are whining about everything they can think of on campus and off campus...playing video games 3-4 hours a day - my son does three 12 hour clinicals plus class, plus homework...and does it very well.

Most of the classes in High School have almost zero affect on how well you do in college, and certainly in life. The character development in playing sports absolutely does.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

And another thing....just look at the statistics of how much better high school athletes do in their careers than non-athletes. They do better in college, they get better jobs and they earn more and advance more in those jobs.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

The first thing to grasp from the Chart, is that as I have said for literally a decade or more, is that we pay teachers TONS of money. There is only two countries that pay more than we do. Netherlands and Canada.

This non-stop drum beat, that we need to shell out more money, is crazy.

The second thing to grasp, is that some of the lowest paid teachers, are producing the highest quality students. Finland, Estonia, Poland, all out perform US students by a wide margin, and yet are paid a fraction as much.

I wager Vietnam, and Taiwan are also paid a fraction as much, but are not on your list.

The third thing to grasp, is that most of these education systems, spend less time teaching than do our teachers.

I would suggest that it's not really because they are just so amazing, that they can teach in 4 hours, what our teachers take all day to teach.... but rather because they are not required to teach as much, other than the fundamentals.

I would be caution in drawing to many broad assumptions from this one chart.

Consider- the US is the largest country by population on the chart, and also one of the most diverse in race, and culture. Most people would assume that having these types of diversities makes effective education more difficult. US also educates many more people and has had a large numbers of immigrants over the last decade.

A Record-Setting Decade of Immigration: 2000-2010

 

[BuckToothMoron]

Japan is very aggressive about sports. Especially swimming and basketball.

I doubt that. From my understanding, the elementary schools have zero sports at all. If a parent wishes their child to be part of a sports team, they must join a club, and pay for it themselves.

The elementary school in my home town, recently paid millions to have two baseball diamond built, with an electronic score board. Complete waste of money.

Japan does encourage sports in general, and I have no problem with joining a sports team either. I have no problem with people being active.

Here is what I am opposed to....

View attachment 73198

That's not a major NFL stadium.... That's a high school. The stadium.... is bigger.... than the school.

Hello..... something is wrong. Priorities are screwed up somewhere.

$60 Million dollars for a high school sports stadium? HIGH SCHOOL? There was a school in Ohio that paid out $320,000 for an upgrade to their stadium. That's nutz, let alone millions....

This is the issue.

Now I'll tell you what.... when we cut the education system cost to the level of Japan, which is quite a bit less than how much we spend.... and when we have education outcomes similar to Japan, which are nearly double ours..... THEN you can justify to me, spending tons of money on sports.

I doubt that a country as large as the US (320 mil) compared to Japan which is less than a 1/3 the size, and with a much more ethnically diverse population, will ever be able to produce an education system that is effective as Japan's. It's not a fair comparison.

 

[Unkotare]

For many students, fitting sports into their schedule forces them to develop time management skills that help make them better students.

 

[Andylusion]

Comparing tests from the 1800s is highly irrational. Talk about apples and oranges....

Really? Based on what do you make that claim? Are you suggesting that doing basic math answers are fundamentally different?

Or that geography is different?

Is the answer for what is a verb, different today?

What is different is only that students of the same grade level, wouldn't be able to answer those questions today.

 

[Unkotare]

Comparing tests from the 1800s is highly irrational. Talk about apples and oranges....

Really? ......

Really. The first compulsory education law in the US wasn't passed until 1852 in Massachusetts. I'm going to pay you the compliment of hoping you can figure out the rest. Don't disappoint me.

 

[Andylusion]

And another thing....just look at the statistics of how much better high school athletes do in their careers than non-athletes. They do better in college, they get better jobs and they earn more and advance more in those jobs.

So I'm curious about this.
Athletics vs. Academics

How do you explain this?

Mary Willingham’s stunning charges that 60 percent of the University of North Carolina’s (UNC) football and basketball players read below the 8th grade level, and eight percent to 10 percent read at or below a third grade level, have reignited questions and controversies, not only around North Carolina’s beleaguered efforts to restore its academic reputation, but about college athletics more generally. Although some members of the UNC community have questioned Willingham’s data, there is no denying the fraught relationship between big-time college athletics and colleges’ academic mission.​

Are we to assume that somehow between high school and college, the high school athletes move on to degrees, and in college all that is left is the brainless idiots? What is going on there?

Why Student Athletes Continue To Fail

He wrote that he’d gone to Ohio State to play football, not “to play school,” and that classes were pointless.​

This is what I see all the time. Constantly. That does not mean what I am seeing is right.... it might be wrong. But I keep reading this stuff, and it doesn't show me much in the way of good news.

Now is there support for your argument? Sure. A little.

Why team sports really do improve grades: Link between self-esteem and better performance in the classroom

Slight improvement on grade point average. But it's slight. Do they finish high school at a higher rate? Yes. Neither is surprising. Football stars want to play football. Can't do that if you drop out. Not a shock.

Plus, in general people who hate school, and have no interest in being there, are both more likely to drop out, and more likely to not be on the football team. I would cite myself as an example. I hated school, and I hated high school activities. I never dropped out, but inherently few people hate school, but love doing school activities. This is not shocking either.

Moreover, we have numerous examples of students that had their grades adjusted up, so they could stay on the football teams, which also automatically means they are less likely to flunk, or drop out. Again, nothing surprising there.

People Who Played High-School Sports Make More Money and Get Better Jobs

Now on this one, it suggests that high school athletes do better in their long term careers. But again.... the difference is extremely small. 4 percentage points is not exactly earth shattering.

Now I want to repost, what I said before. I never suggested to you that I was against sports. I'm not. I want to end school based sports. That's true. But that is not the same as being against sports.

Here is my argument. Let us even pretend for the sake of simplicity, that the article I just posted above, is absolutely true. Now I find that difficult... but let's just roll with it. You are right, and the article shows that there is a professional career boast to being in sports.....

1... Do you think that this career boast would exist if they played in a.... $200,000 Stadium instead of a $70 Million dollar stadium?

I think so. If there is all the benefits you suggest, then I would wager those benefits can be had, without blowing $70 Million dollars on a stadium.

2... Do you think that this career boast would exist if they played in a.... Non-school funded sports program?

I think so. In fact if you read that article I posted, they say exactly as much.

In Germany, where some youth sports don’t exist in an academic context, being an athlete still was associated with higher earnings down the line, which suggests some of the same dynamics might be at work even when sports are decoupled from school.​

Do you see? Even where sports are decoupled from schools, where schools are not funding sports, not administering sports, and not blowing $70 million on stadiums for sports..... they still found that people who joined non-school-based sports programs showed higher earnings.

And that is my point. In fact I know I read that Germany didn't have school based sports years ago, I'm glad this article reminded me of it.

And I would once again, suggest this is why US students test scores, are 25th in math, and 17th in science, while Germany is 10th and 9th respectively.

Their schools are focused on...... schooling. Not playing sports. Now I'm not suggesting they don't play sports. They do... just not at school. School is for schooling.

And by the way, this is one change of many I'd suggest. I'm not suggesting separating sports would fix everything.

 

[Andylusion]

Comparing tests from the 1800s is highly irrational. Talk about apples and oranges....

Really? ......

Really. The first compulsory education law in the US wasn't passed until 1852 in Massachusetts. I'm going to pay you the compliment of hoping you can figure out the rest. Don't disappoint me.

I'm afraid I'm going to disappoint, because I already specifically said 1890s. So that would be 40 years after.

But even so.... I still don't see what relevance that has. The tests I was looking at, was the 8th grade final tests. These are the tests that students were expected to pass, or they didn't go to 9th grade. They didn't go to high school. The questions on this test were pretty basic math, reading and writing questions. Fairly basic geography questions.

But today those questions would be found at 11th or 12th grade. Not 8th.

Interestingly, I did get a chance to go to a private school, not as a student, but through a program. And I was curious what the 8th grade students at this school were learning. Ironically it was exactly the same material I was learning in my upper-middle class school in 12th grade.

So it would seem that the learning standards of public schools in the 1890s, is the same as private schools today... or similar. Where as the average public school has fallen back about 4 years.

 

[Andylusion]

Japan is very aggressive about sports. Especially swimming and basketball.

I doubt that. From my understanding, the elementary schools have zero sports at all. If a parent wishes their child to be part of a sports team, they must join a club, and pay for it themselves.

The elementary school in my home town, recently paid millions to have two baseball diamond built, with an electronic score board. Complete waste of money.

Japan does encourage sports in general, and I have no problem with joining a sports team either. I have no problem with people being active.

Here is what I am opposed to....

View attachment 73198

That's not a major NFL stadium.... That's a high school. The stadium.... is bigger.... than the school.

Hello..... something is wrong. Priorities are screwed up somewhere.

$60 Million dollars for a high school sports stadium? HIGH SCHOOL? There was a school in Ohio that paid out $320,000 for an upgrade to their stadium. That's nutz, let alone millions....

This is the issue.

Now I'll tell you what.... when we cut the education system cost to the level of Japan, which is quite a bit less than how much we spend.... and when we have education outcomes similar to Japan, which are nearly double ours..... THEN you can justify to me, spending tons of money on sports.

I doubt that a country as large as the US (320 mil) compared to Japan which is less than a 1/3 the size, and with a much more ethnically diverse population, will ever be able to produce an education system that is effective as Japan's. It's not a fair comparison.

Well first off, we are supposed to be a republic. Each state should be taking care of it's own education program, which would mean the largest state is only 38 Million. I think that is manageable.

Now as we move more towards being a dictatorship from Washington, then yes, I would agree. If we end up giving the Federal Government sole responsibility for nation wide education, then yeah, that won't be manageable.

Second, there are several countries that are in fact ethnically diverse, and yet have better education systems. Canada is a great example. High ethnic diversity, religious and language differences. But they score extremely high education way.

So I would disagree with you, if you mean that it isn't possible for the US to have a great education system. Because we did. I firmly believe that.

On the other hand, if you would argue that the US will not choose to have a good education system, then I agree.

The solution to education is going to be to reverse the direction of the entire system for the last 50 years. And both students, and teacher, and special interest groups, and those in government, are going to oppose it at every possible turn.

We see that in Chile right now. By any educational measurement, Chile has the best education system in all of Latin America. In fact, Chile has students come from all over Latin America to get education in Chile. And yet, the public is rioting and protesting their system. Because it works. They would rather be dumb.

And I see the same problem here in America.

 

[Unkotare]

Comparing tests from the 1800s is highly irrational. Talk about apples and oranges....

Really? ......

Really. The first compulsory education law in the US wasn't passed until 1852 in Massachusetts. I'm going to pay you the compliment of hoping you can figure out the rest. Don't disappoint me.

I'm afraid I'm going to disappoint, because I already specifically said 1890s. So that would be 40 years after......

You certainly do disappoint. Are you trying to prove your own point about poor education by using yourself as an example?

In the 1890s, compulsory education laws were not even on the books in all of the 42 states, to say nothing of universal enforcement. How do you think student enrollment then compares to today? How do the two periods compare in terms of student populations, variety of needs, courses offered, record-keeping? How do you think students with special needs were treated back then? You are basically proposing to compare the top 1% of students at Cambridge Rindge and Latin School with every student in every public school in the nation today. I didn't want to think you were this stupid, but apparently you are.

 

[Andylusion]

Comparing tests from the 1800s is highly irrational. Talk about apples and oranges....

Really? ......

Really. The first compulsory education law in the US wasn't passed until 1852 in Massachusetts. I'm going to pay you the compliment of hoping you can figure out the rest. Don't disappoint me.

I'm afraid I'm going to disappoint, because I already specifically said 1890s. So that would be 40 years after......

You certainly do disappoint. Are you trying to prove your own point about poor education by using yourself as an example?

In the 1890s, compulsory education laws were not even on the books in all of the 42 states, to say nothing of universal enforcement. How do you think student enrollment then compares to today? How do the two periods compare in terms of student populations, variety of needs, courses offered, record-keeping? How do you think students with special needs were treated back then? You are basically proposing to compare the top 1% of students at Cambridge Rindge and Latin School with every student in every public school in the nation today. I didn't want to think you were this stupid, but apparently you are.

YES DUDE YES! I am a product of public education! Yes. I made it through. What does that tell you?
Worse, I know people a fraction as smart as me, that also made it though. Scary!

Man I could tell you some crazy stories man. There was this ditzy blonde girl.... 'duh'... like super 'duh'.... AND SHE PASSED!. Yeah, man, I am most definitely using myself as the perfect example.

First your argument doesn't apply. The test I was looking at was Kansas 1895, and Kansas had compulsory education by 1874. So that failed.

What is even more funny, is that you seem to be making my point.

First, why should you need a wider variety of courses offered at 8th grade? That is one of my arguments, is that we shouldn't. Especially in the early grades, students should be focused on fundamentals. They can learn about Pandas and saving the whales outside of school.

Variety of needs... are there kids that don't need math? Don't need English? What other needs, should we be catering up to 8th grade, to replace those fundamentals?

I mean your basic argument, is exactly my argument. We had to lower standards to allow more people to pass. We have to lower standards to accommodate these "student populations, variety of needs, courses offered, record-keeping".

That's the exact opposite of what we should do. Take Finland, and many other countries.... they don't lower standards to accommodate students. You either keep up, or you get out. They remove you. In most of these countries, if you don't pass an entrance exam to high school... you don't even go to high school.

 

[Unkotare]

.... The test I was looking at was Kansas 1895, and Kansas had compulsory education by 1874. .....

Through the 1800s, most Kansans did not attend school past the 8th grade. You are trying to compare an elite cadre of the wealthiest, most privileged with the entire public school system today. Does not hold water.

 

[Unkotare]

......

First, why should you need a wider variety of courses offered at 8th grade? ......

Because the country, the economy, and the world changes over time.

 

[Unkotare]

....

Variety of needs... .....

Yes, we accommodate students today with a variety of physical and mental needs that would never have had access to an education in the 1800s, if they survived at all.

 

[Unkotare]

..... Take Finland, and many other countries.... they don't lower standards to accommodate students. You either keep up, or you get out. They remove you. In most of these countries, if you don't pass an entrance exam to high school... you don't even go to high school.

In my country we have compulsory education laws in all 50 states. Look up "compulsory."

 

[BuckToothMoron]

Japan is very aggressive about sports. Especially swimming and basketball.

I doubt that. From my understanding, the elementary schools have zero sports at all. If a parent wishes their child to be part of a sports team, they must join a club, and pay for it themselves.

The elementary school in my home town, recently paid millions to have two baseball diamond built, with an electronic score board. Complete waste of money.

Japan does encourage sports in general, and I have no problem with joining a sports team either. I have no problem with people being active.

Here is what I am opposed to....

View attachment 73198

That's not a major NFL stadium.... That's a high school. The stadium.... is bigger.... than the school.

Hello..... something is wrong. Priorities are screwed up somewhere.

$60 Million dollars for a high school sports stadium? HIGH SCHOOL? There was a school in Ohio that paid out $320,000 for an upgrade to their stadium. That's nutz, let alone millions....

This is the issue.

Now I'll tell you what.... when we cut the education system cost to the level of Japan, which is quite a bit less than how much we spend.... and when we have education outcomes similar to Japan, which are nearly double ours..... THEN you can justify to me, spending tons of money on sports.

I doubt that a country as large as the US (320 mil) compared to Japan which is less than a 1/3 the size, and with a much more ethnically diverse population, will ever be able to produce an education system that is effective as Japan's. It's not a fair comparison.

Well first off, we are supposed to be a republic. Each state should be taking care of it's own education program, which would mean the largest state is only 38 Million. I think that is manageable.

Now as we move more towards being a dictatorship from Washington, then yes, I would agree. If we end up giving the Federal Government sole responsibility for nation wide education, then yeah, that won't be manageable.

Second, there are several countries that are in fact ethnically diverse, and yet have better education systems. Canada is a great example. High ethnic diversity, religious and language differences. But they score extremely high education way.

So I would disagree with you, if you mean that it isn't possible for the US to have a great education system. Because we did. I firmly believe that.

On the other hand, if you would argue that the US will not choose to have a good education system, then I agree.

The solution to education is going to be to reverse the direction of the entire system for the last 50 years. And both students, and teacher, and special interest groups, and those in government, are going to oppose it at every possible turn.

We see that in Chile right now. By any educational measurement, Chile has the best education system in all of Latin America. In fact, Chile has students come from all over Latin America to get education in Chile. And yet, the public is rioting and protesting their system. Because it works. They would rather be dumb.

And I see the same problem here in America.

I concur that education should be left up to the states. It won't happen without the repeal f the 17th Amendment.

 

[Andylusion]

......

First, why should you need a wider variety of courses offered at 8th grade? ......

Because the country, the economy, and the world changes over time.

I disagree. Completely. 100%. Could not possibly disagree with that more.

We're talking the fundamentals here. Basic reading. Basic writing. Basic math.

I don't care what job you do, in any field, in any career, anywhere.... you need these basics. Simple math. The ability to understand what is written, and the ability to write legibly so other people can understand you.

When I was hired on as a manager of a project, I would track down and find people who had excellent hand writing, and tell them that I appreciated it. Why? Because it's like finding a unicorn now. People can't use proper punctuation. Some can't even put a period at the end of a sentence. Others spell so badly, every message from them is like feeding hieroglyphs into babelfish, and expecting to get a coherent conversation out of it.

And then the math. The simplest things. Doing count cycles in the stock room, with a guy who can't add. Cycle count takes an entire extra day of work, because we have to re-count everything he did, because it was all wrong.

And then you wonder why people like that never get promoted?

Here's Bob. He's been to college for a dozen remedial courses, has a high school diploma, and can't be trusted with anything involving numbers, and any paperwork he turns in will be indecipherable gibberish. But he can almost speak French, passed a class on 'life management', can make a bird feeder out of spare wood, and has an A+ in British Poetic History.

Does Bob get the promotion? No. Why? Because poetic history, spare wood working, and 'life management' doesn't get you a job. What gets you a job is the ability to do the work. Can you read? Can you write? Can you do math?

If you have those fundamentals, you can work your way up almost any corporate ladder. You can work at McDonalds, and end up owning the whole store, if you can do those things, because management skills can be taught. But no company is going to pay to have you learn how to add up your revenues, and subtract your expenses. No company that I know of, will pay to have you learn how to write an email, so you can communicate with your co-workers without causing them to down entire 500 pill bottles of aspirin every time they have to figure out your crossword puzzle messages.

That MUST be done in the K-12 level schooling, and the fact is.... it's not. Just saying.

 

[Andylusion]

....

Variety of needs... .....

Yes, we accommodate students today with a variety of physical and mental needs that would never have had access to an education in the 1800s, if they survived at all.

And I don't think we should. Again, I cited Finland. If you have physical or mental needs, you are booted out. You go to specials schools for that. Public schools should not be trying to make Einsteins out of Forest Gumps.

And when you try and do that, the teacher simply can't teach the class, while holding hands with kids that have problems. Even if your kid is just unruly, he should be booted out. Again, I cite my own experience. I can remember classes where the teacher spent the entire class time dealing with one kid who simply wouldn't mind his work. Now at that time, I thought it was great because we all know that the teacher couldn't test us on stuff she didn't have time to teach. Made our lives easier in the moment.

But of course looking back, we were not getting educated.