Teachers and Classrooms Scrape For Funds While Educationcrats Reap Hefty Salaries

The average U. S. Department of Education bureaucrat makes twice as much as the higher paid starting teachers.

According to Glassdoor.com statistics the average Education Department employee makes around $85,000 per year.  Program specialists can make over six figures while a contracting officer can earn over $163,000.

Meanwhile teacher salaries lag in many states.  National Education Association statistics show that as of October 2012, West Virginia starting teachers make just over $32,000 per year.  The District of Columbia offers over $51,000 per year, but this pay rate is much higher than many states that rank near them on the list.

Individually, Department of Education hires may be well educated and qualified.  As an institution, however, the Department has failed.  A Cato Institute study shows that student achievement has remained flat or slightly dipped since the Department of Education was founded.

In 2008, Heritage Foundation released a study that found substantial increases in education spending had not been reflected in student achievement.

With all of the spending increases, how is it that classrooms remain underfunded, sports teams get cut, and teacher salaries lag behind inflation?

The problem is federal mandates.  Statutes such as No Child Left Behind have brought burdens to public schools, but have not noticeably boosted achievement.  Increasing federal meddling in schools means that a lot of bureaucrats get cushy salaries while teachers must work harder to meet ever increasing federal demands.

And the federal government has done nothing to make schools better.  Many argue that public schooling is a dysfunctional and dying system.

The answer lies in eliminating the Department of Education and returning primary control of schools to locally elected boards.  Obviously some boards do well and others fail.  But at least they can be held accountable by voters.  Bureaucrats continually fail, but keep their jobs and make hefty paychecks. 

The Question of Year Round School and Obama's Education Visions

Obama has come out this week, as usual, making a generalized speech that echoes some conservative thoughts. Of course we now know that with Obama, the devil is in the details. Yes he says schools need reformed, not just money. Of course he is not mentioning that he would most certainly love to see the Department of Education get more authority at the expense of the states and the local systems.

One idea that Obama has discussed is the creation of a year round school calendar. Many agree with this idea, seeing it as a necessary modernization from an agricultural calendar. However, what would we give up if we adopted this plan, which would substitute regular vacations of a few weeks for the three month break.

I would hate it, personally. I love the extra time that I get to spend with my children during the summer. We take trips, go swimming or fishing, visit relatives, and just hang out around the house together. It's a time for families, if they choose, to reinforce their values and enjoy each other's company. Few people agree with all the values taught in school. Now, parents get three months to counteract those influences.

Second, the summer right now is a chance to broaden a child's experiences. That might come from sports camps, science camps, trips to historical sites, or something else. For many children, this is the education that they would never get in school.

Then comes the cost. Like all Obama ideas, this is extremely costly and ther eis no money to pay. Teachers and administrators would see all their salaries go up by 25%. There would be more wear and tear on school busses and facilities. Who pays for Obama's ideas? Not Obama. We do.

School failures boil down in large part to large classes and consolidation, not as much the "bad teachers" that Obama wants to get rid of. We need to put money into maintenance and not building shiny, glitzy new fangled buildings just so politicians can stand in front of them. The White House was built over two centuries ago and still functions. Schools built four decades ago are being torn down and replaced. Why? We also got away from teaching kids the basics so that we could somehow raise their self-esteem. We teach cultural geography now so that kids can know what Indians do in Peru even though they cannot find Ireland on a map. Fox News just reported that a teacher was using rap music to spur thinking. While it is nice that they want people to think, why not use something that in itself is also educational, such as real poetry, political speeches, or something from some point in history that will actually educate a child rather than degenerate their brain. Can I at least ask that this teacher find something written in the King's English? Of course the teacher him or herself probably never read The Federalist Papers, or even heard them mentioned. Teachers are not as well educated as they once were either. The system has beaten down good teachers and made them apathetic.

Schools need fixed. Obama is the last person that we want to impose his vision, though.