One of the most memorable experiences of my graduate school education was watching a video of a classroom in Japan. I was in Introduction to Education Policy, and we were discussing the issue of class size. The Gates Foundation had just grabbed headlines for its cause du jour–SMALL SCHOOLS!–by throwing money at large comprehensive high schools to encourage them to break themselves up into pieces.

It was 2004. And unlike their attitudes towards cars and bling, the American people seemed convinced that smaller is better as far as the classroom is concerned.

So you can imagine how unexpected it was to see that a “model” classroom in Japan–where students regularly outperform kids in the U.S.–had about 40 students. The neatly groomed eighth graders sat upright and mesmerized by their energetic young teacher, who bounced around the room from math problem to math problem among a sea of raised hands. He then divided the students into teams and held a math-off. They battled for victory with the thirst of a professional athlete going for a championship and accompanying endorsement deals.

The scene was like a Bizarro American classroom.

What struck me most was how irrelevant the conventional “small classroom” wisdom of the time seemed. Obviously, these kids were learning even though there was more of them. But the teacher really knew what he was doing, and the students respected him for it.

So what makes a good teacher? It’s the kind of thing where you’ll know it when you see it. We’ve all experienced the difference between good and bad instruction in the classroom. Unfortunately, when it comes with quantifying or describing what makes a good teacher, social science still has a long way to go.

There’s no doubt that some of it comes down to respect. It’s no secret that teachers in this country are often looked down upon or under-appreciated (something many scholars trace back to a long standing tradition of teaching as “women’s work”), especially compared to doctors, lawyers and other professionals. So, I was happily surprised to read an article in the New York Times a few weeks ago that announced that a charter school called the Equity Project was planning to pay teachers $125,000 a year.

It’s not that I believe wholeheartedly in free market economics. Market-based incentives like high salaries won’t take care of all the problems in our nation’s schools by themselves. If only it were that easy.

Still, we live in a society where respect is highly correlated with paycheck size. Changing the way that teachers are perceived and acknowledging the demands of this important work is a crucial first step towards cultivating an atmosphere that nurtures instruction.

Believe it or not, paying teachers six-figures-plus is possible with public funds in city schools. It’s just a matter or priorities. Equity Project teachers will be asked to work longer hours and more days per year to take over responsibilities like coordinating attendance or disciplining students. Cutting back on school administrators will free up money in the budget for teacher salaries. In addition, the classes will be fairly large with an average of 28 students, and the school will only offer music and Latin as electives.

As Zeke Vanderhook, the school’s founding principal, told the New York Times, “I would much rather put a phenomenal, great teacher in a field with 30 kids and nothing else than take the mediocre teacher and give them half the number of students and give them all the technology in the world.”

Mr. Vanderhook will actually be making $35,000 a year less than they teachers he hires. How’s that for respect?
__
Kidz Today is a weekly column on youth and education by Joie Jager-Hyman. It usually runs on Wednesdays.