In many regions across the United States, the number of out-of-field teachers is growing while the number of college students entering teaching continues to fall and more teachers are leaving the classroom. While pundits want to target a major cause, there are likely a combination of factors that have caused this 20-year decline that varies by region, grade level and discipline.

The National Education Association just released the 2016-2017 average starting teacher salary data; state-by-state averages are on its website. The national average starting salary was $38,617 with New Jersey at $51,179 and Missouri at $31,842. Oklahoma was second lowest; it recently increased its education budget by 19 percent, only to see its teacher shortage grow larger.

Money can be a factor driving a shortage in rich communities and in select disciplines. Even within one state, the cost-of-living can vary dramatically. In affluent areas in California and Colorado, teachers cannot afford to live in the communities where they teach. In some states, affluent suburban schools hire away teachers from sparsely populated rural districts. Failure to consolidate leaves those rural students with out-of-field teachers and fewer academic opportunities.

While graduates do not enter teaching for the money, more are leaving teaching as their salaries continue to fall behind inflation. Science teachers in particular find they can double their salary in other science jobs. While there is regional variation, in most portions of the country the purchasing power of the average teacher was greatest in the early 1970s, and has fallen behind ever since. Some teachers are frustrated with lack of student discipline and lack of administrator support. The end of corporal punishment, new “no touch” policies, and the ending of out-of-school suspension have also to some teachers leaving the classroom.

Loss of teacher tenure in Kansas, and loss of new teacher tenure in North Carolina caused immediate drop-offs of college students pursuing teaching careers, actions that students nationwide witnessed.

Some states eliminated an automatic pay raise for a master’s degree. While research showed a master’s degree in education provided no student improvement, a master’s degree in math or science did raise their students’ scores. When districts threw away that incentive across-the-board, it resulted in a decrease in teachers pursing higher degrees.

Viewed across the last 20 years, the decline in teachers shows several patterns. With the implementation of No Child Left Behind external testing in the early 2000s, many high school students observed their teachers’ loss of professional authority. By the mid-2000s, it then became harder to recruit those students, now in college, into teaching when they had seen that professional erosion. At this same time, more veteran teachers were taking early retirement while a new generation of student teachers were being trained in education schools to teach to external assessments. School administrators lauded this young malleable cohort of teachers who, unlike the veteran teachers, could be ordered from above to adopt an unending array of new reforms and be rewarded with merit pay.

This era of “transformational leadership” and reform-from-above may be coming to an end. The recent Denver strike was not just about pay, but also sent a clear signal that the ProComp merit pay system of controlling teachers by awards was no longer being tolerated.

Because a major portion of each state’s general fund goes to K–12 education, the 2008 Great Recession cut school spending nationwide. While the U.S. economy has recovered and a few states have seen boosts in funding, a recently released analysis by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities finds about half of state funding formulas have not recovered to pre-recession levels.

However, “dissatisfaction with how I am treated as a teaching professional” ranked highest on a survey given at the beginning of this millennium. It was a greater concern than pay or student discipline. That question has not appeared on a major teacher survey since, leading education commentators to only look at other factors. Would that item be heavily marked today…or have we now lost too many of our best?

John Richard Schrock is a professor at Emporia State University.

By RON WILSON
Huck Boyd National Institute for Rural Development

“Let’s blow up a giant bale of hay!” That comment might not be what one would expect to hear in a typical corporate brainstorming session, but it was the type of tongue-in-cheek idea which surfaced among the creative marketers at one rural Kansas company. The people in this company are not only having fun, they represent one of the nation’s leading producers of agricultural, turf, and hydraulic power equipment.

Tim Penner is president and CEO of Harper Industries in Harper, Kansas. Tim explained that the company began with a man named Dewey Hostetler. “He had a knack for seeing how a farmer could use equipment,” Tim said. In his farm shop near Harper, Dewey started designing equipment for handling hay. It worked so well that it spawned a company to make these products. The business was incorporated in 1974.

As a play on his first name, the products came to be called DewEze. The DewEze product line has grown and expanded over time.

The manufacturing company grew in Harper. Tim Penner came from Nebraska and joined the company as an administrator in 1991. The company was bought by out-of-state investors, but in 1998, they decided to divest themselves of the business.

Tim Penner and his staff in Harper stepped up to buy the business. It became Harper Industries and remains a locally owned and operated business today, producing DewEze products and others.

The results are remarkable. The company has gone from a $5 million dollar business in 1998 to a $25 million business today. Employment has more than doubled and the product line has advanced.

The DewEze hay handling truck beds remain a staple of the company’s business, as these have been refined over time. “We make more of these (hay handling flatbeds) than any other company,” Tim Penner said. The product line now includes various types of bale beds, feeders and related equipment. The company is represented by some 200 dealers across the U.S. and Canada.

 

Another product line, Harper turf products, relates to turfgrass management. Harper Industries engineers designed a piece of self-propelled equipment that includes a self-leveling, tilting mower deck so that hillsides can be mowed safely. This product was recognized as one of the top 50 innovations by the American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineering.

Harper Industries has continued to innovate. Company leaders point out that the hydraulic systems used for handling big round bales can have other applications too.  “We are now getting into the automotive wrecker market, aerial lifts, and snow removal,” Tim said.

“People are our greatest strength and our number one asset,” Tim said. He proudly notes that the average tenure of Harper Industries employees is 11 years – remarkable in the manufacturing industry.

Company employees also like to have fun. They came up with a creative idea as an April Fools’ Day project. They decided to stage a video which demonstrated a mock new product through which big round bales were blown up in the field.

I thought this was hilarious. The video includes a producer testimonial saying how easy it is to “distribute” the hay at the touch of a button. They also videoed Luke Thornton, Harper Industries vice president of operations. With a straight face, Luke talked about how blowing up the hay bale achieved “superior hay dispersal” for the cows. The crew even used an open field to, very carefully, explode a hay bale.

The video was released right before April 1, 2018. As one might guess, it became popular on YouTube. The video reached an estimated three million people on Facebook.  Wow. The video ends with the words, “DewEze – April Fools’.”

It’s just one example of the fun, creative approach followed by Harper Industries. For more information, see www.deweze.com or www.harperindustries.com.

“Let’s blow up a hay bale!” It’s probably not the typical corporate brainstorm, but it did make a fun idea for Harper Industries. We salute Tim Penner, Luke Thornton, and all the people of Harper Industries for making a difference with an innovative, successful, home-grown business in rural Kansas. I’m glad to see that their business has blown up.

By DOUG ANSTAETT
Kansas Press Association

It’s been a grueling winter. We’ve had record snowfalls in parts of Kansas, and cabin fever has taken its toll on all of us.

The time has come for a hearty dose of sunshine.

There could be no better time to be observing National Sunshine Week, a time for citizens and elected officials alike to recommit themselves to the ideals of open government.

National Sunshine Week is March 10 through 16. The week is a joint effort between the American Society of News Editors, the Reporters Committee on Freedom of the Press and the various associations that promote open government across the nation, including the Kansas Press Association, the Kansas Association of Broadcasters and the Kansas Sunshine Coalition for Open Government.

Why should Kansans care about this?

Because although public officials often talk a good line on transparency when running for office, when it comes time to walk the walk in Topeka or Washington, they hide behind a myriad of excuses for why secrecy is preferable.

Here are just a few of the excuses we hear almost every year at the Kansas Statehouse:

We can’t have frank discussions about the issues when the press is breathing down our necks.
We can’t record all committee votes because they will be used against us in the next election.
We can’t have a hearing on every bill filed or we’d be here forever.
We can’t get the best results legislatively unless we use procedures such as “gut and go” and bill bundling to break logjams.
We can’t afford the technology to video stream from every hearing room at the Capitol.

Do you detect a recurring theme here?

“Can’t” seems to be the stock answer to every attempt to open up the political process.

It would be far more productive to discover ways to instead say “yes we can.”

The 450 newspaper and broadcast station members of KPA and KAB try to do their part to make sure public bodies are following the law, but they could use your help. Citizens who take their participatory form of government seriously can provide effective oversight when they attend meetings, seek records or observe their public officials in action.

You may wonder how you can help.

Do your local public bodies give proper notice of their meetings, well in advance so the public can attend?

When they do meet, do they discuss policy issues in public or do they seem to have their minds made up when the meeting begins, as if they’ve ironed out all the wrinkles in advance and behind closed doors?

Do they abuse the closed session exceptions to the Kansas Open Meetings Act?

And does it ever appear the body has voted outside the public meeting room, which is illegal?

If you observe any of the above, contact your local news organization and tell a staff member what you have observed. Or you might consider writing a letter to the editor. Those who like to work in secret prefer not to be called out in public for their transgressions.

KOMA and the Kansas Open Records Act require that meetings and records of public bodies be open to the public.

While some elected and appointed officials often carry out their duties lawfully, there are some who don’t believe they owe the public anything, that they can meet when they want, where they want, sometimes without telling their constituents about it at all. Others believe they can charge such exorbitant rates for access to public records that they make such access unaffordable for citizens and even most members of the press.

When you attend meetings, seek public records and question those in authority about how they are conducting themselves, you are doing your part to help keep government open, accessible and accountable.

“Sunshine” is a perfect description of how government should operate. It means that the public’s business is discussed thoroughly in public, with the public’s participation, and it means decisions are never made behind closed doors.

Please join us in making sure meetings and records remain open to the public and that our government officials not only understand the law, but follow it.

Doug Anstaett is the former executive director of the Kansas Press Association and serves on the board of the Kansas Sunshine Coalition for Open Government.

Hays Post/Eagle Communications is a member of both the Kansas Press Association and the Kansas Association of Broadcasters.

By LESLEY SCHMIDT
American Agri-Women

If you’re like many Americans, the answer is the grocery store. And frankly, that disturbs me. The grocery store isn’t where food comes from – it is just from where it is distributed. In reality, far too many people are unaware of the role of American agriculture in their daily lives… and what it really takes to have food on their dinner table.

You, I and 163 other people ate today because of one American farmer… a dramatic increase from 19 people in the 1940s. Quite simply, American agriculture is doing more – and doing it better. Agriculture is this nation’s #1 export and vitally important in sustaining a healthy economy.

A majority of us know our food and fiber don’t just arrive at the grocery or clothing store… or magically appear on our dinner table or in our closet. There is an entire industry dedicated to providing consumers with the safest, most wholesome and nutritious products possible… as well as a wide range of comfortable, fashionable clothing choices. We rely on agriculture for the very necessities of life. From beef and pork to cotton and wheat, agriculture is working harder than ever to meet the needs of Americans and others around the world.

The role of farmers will become even more critical with the exploding world population. Today, approximately 7.4 billion people call earth their home. By 2050, the population is projected to reach 9.7 billion and 11.2 billion by 2100 (UN DESA, 2015a, p.3). Growth in the human population is mainly a product of declining mortality from improvements in food production, medication, sanitation, and energy sources.

And it’s not just the farmer who makes our food possible. The entire agriculture industry, all the way to the grocery store, are vital links in a chain which brings food to every consumer – and millions of people abroad.

Frankly, it’s easy to take agriculture for granted in America. Our food is readily accessible and safe. For this, we’re unbelievably fortunate…but that doesn’t mean we don’t have an obligation to recognize how it’s made possible.

Just a few generations ago, most people were a part of – and had friends or relatives involved with – agriculture. Today, that’s no longer the case. That’s why I’m writing, because agriculture is responsible for providing the necessities of life… food, fiber, and fuel. And it’s about time Americans recognize that contribution!

Americans continue to enjoy a food, fiber and fuel supply which is abundant, affordable overall and among the world’s safest, thanks in large part to the efficiency and productivity of America’s farm and ranch families.

We officially recognize our farmers and all they do to make our lives better during Agriculture Week, March 10-16, 2019, hosted by The Agriculture Council of America (www.agday.org). Agriculture Week is a good time to reflect – and be grateful for – American Agriculture! This marks a nationwide effort to tell the true story of American Agriculture and remind consumers, agriculture is a part of all of us.

Be part of America’s Agriculture, if even just for one day. Take a drive in the country with your family, as there is no prettier green than winter wheat fields waking from winter dormancy. And give a big wave if you see a farmer. I guarantee they’ll wave back.

Happy Agriculture Week! #AgDay365

Lesley Schmidt is Vice President of Education for American Agri-Women, Park City.

At first hearing, President Trump’s recent announcement of a planned presidential order to mandate free speech on college campuses might seem to be just what free expression advocates would support.

However, regrettably, they should not. Keep reading, please.

Taking a shortcut through the First Amendment in the name of free speech is not a good idea — and that’s what Trump’s approach will be, no matter how admirable the stated goal of encouraging and protecting the rights of all in university communities to speak freely.

Trump’s approach is to tie freedom of speech to federal funding for universities: “If they want our dollars, and we give it to them by the billions…Free speech. If they don’t, it will be costly. That will be signed soon,” he told the Conservative Political Action Conference annual convention.

Conservatives have long complained — in my view, with justification at some higher-ed institutions — that liberal academics have created an atmosphere where views of faculty or outside speakers from “the right” are unwelcome. In recent years, a number of high-profile, controversial speakers claiming conservative credentials have been heckled, harassed or prevented from speaking.

In 2017, conservative author Ann Coulter canceled a speech at the University of California, Berkeley, amid fears of violent student protest. At Texas Southern University, Houston, a speech by Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, was cancelled because of student opposition.

In announcing his initiative last weekend, Trump cited a Feb. 19 incident in which a man recruiting for a conservative group was punched by one of two men who confronted him at UC Berkeley. But even that example raises questions about how Trump’s proposed “carrot and stick” approach would work and whether it is appropriate there or elsewhere.

Neither the recruiter nor his assailant was reported to be connected to the university. The attacker was arrested, as existing law provides, regardless of where the punch was thrown. Presumably, local justice will run its course without need of a federal, campus-focused “back-up.”

How would — and should — a university be held accountable for the actions of non-university persons? How many incidents, and what kinds of incidents, must occur to rise to the level of a “free speech penalty” that will punish a campus community of thousands or tens of thousands of students? One, two, 10? Who decides and by what measure? Does a punch count 10 times more on the “penalty tally” than a shouted insult?

And what if the punch takes place on a private university campus? Do we want government bureaucrats imposing “free speech” rules on those institutions now constitutionally outside the government’s purview?

Conservatives and liberals alike would historically seem to stand together in opposing government intervention or control over such private enterprises. We ought not hysterically surrender such rights without considering what might be the next “justified” need to trample the independence of non-public colleges and universities.

Another, larger question: Just how widespread is the conflict over conservative speakers, or the entire issue of liberal versus conservative campus speech conflicts? In recent years, as the Freedom Forum Institute has gathered information, made campus visits and convened discussions nationwide, a few observations have emerged: At the vast majority of colleges and universities, speakers of all stripes come and go without objection — the larger battle is not student protest, but student distraction and disinterest regardless of subject matter.

Perhaps 50 campuses out of 4,000-plus higher-education institutions have been embroiled in controversies that directly engage free speech. Granted, in that small group, a number are high-profile or highly-respected institutions. Worrisome, but not worthy of a blanket government surveillance and review system that would be required to fairly impose such draconian penalties on entire campuses for what are likely the actions of a few.

Rather, let us say openly and clearly that colleges should be held by all of us to the high standard of being marketplaces of ideas. Make that criterion one when considering what college to attend or where to make an alumni donation.

Some would say academic freedom means the right to evaluate and exclude some ideas — to focus on the proven and accepted. However, that can quickly morph into intellectual ossification — the collegiate equivalent of what the French scholar Alexis de Tocqueville warned in the 1830s would be the greatest danger to the United States’ new and innovative commitment to free expression and democracy: The “tyranny of the majority,” in which alternative views would cease to be heard.

Let us follow principles already set out by some leaders in the academic world that decry overt or hidden censorship and disavow the false gods of safety, security and “ideas just too dangerous to be heard.”

As to the latter, yes, there are indeed dangerous ideas and inflammatory speakers with no goal other than self-promotion. But it is a futile and dangerous tactic to attempt to suppress a bad idea or arbitrarily extinguish a flame-throwing speaker — particularly in the Internet Age.

Better to propose a new idea and listen to anyone with ideas worth considering — on or off campus.

Gene Policinski is president and chief operating officer of the Freedom Forum Institute. He can be reached at [email protected], or follow him on Twitter at @genefac.