Teacher Sells Ads On Tests

Tom Farber, a calculus teacher at Rancho Bernardo high school in San Diego, has come up with a unique way of covering district cuts to his supplies budget. He sells ads on his tests. "Tough times call for tough actions," Tom says. The price of an ad on a Mr. Farber Calc test is as follows: $10 for a quiz, $20 for a chapter test, and $30 for a semester final. Most of the ads are messages from parents but about a third of them come from local businesses. Principal Paul Robinson says reaction has been "mixed," but adds, "It's not like, 'This test is brought to you by McDonald's or Nike.'" I see his point. Being a local business whore is much better than being a multinational conglomerate whore.

Comments

Cliffs notes

[grassy_knoll]

Perfect place for Cliffs notes ads, eh?

"Next test, use our notes and suck less!"

*snicker*

Works For Me

[VoxMagis]

I mean - if we can get businesses to supplement education funds in any way that is not a rise in taxes, why not?

I think we could put ads on School Buses and more of this type of stuff - sure, have some oversite, but lets get some money where it belongs without forcing businesses and citizens to raise taxes.

Re:Works For Me

[cayenne8]

Hell, just sell the ANSWERS to the test questions...more straightforward and popular I would guess.

Re:Works For Me

[unlametheweak]

If Americans want public education with any degree of quality then they should be willing to fund it appropriately. Otherwise this whole Cable in the Classroom and No Child Left Behind lameness is just a sneaky way of encouraging privatization and school vouchers.

Re:Works For Me

[smooth wombat]

I think we could put ads on School Buses and more of this type of stuff

Right. Because if there's one thing we don't have enough of, it's advertisements.~*

*Testing out the new sarcasm tag

Re:Works For Me

[iron-kurton]

I think you guys are missing the point.

First, there is necessity. They need to pay somehow for the materials for educating the kids. Selling ads on tests is a bandage solution to stop the bleeding.

Second, this guy seems like a smart guy -- he is not only getting money for his materials, but he is also making a very loud statement to the government to pull its head out of its ass and appropriate more education funding.

Finally, it looks like the ads are not inappropriate (for now), and that he's not actually making a profit but only covering the expenses.

Nobody wants higher taxes, nobody wants to pay for education, but nobody wants the schools turning to businesses for funding. Where the hell are they supposed to get money to fund education?!?

Re:Works For Me

[bytesex]

.~* ?

I thought you were adding some perl, man !

Re:Works For Me

[Dracorat]

I'm in Tucson Az. Our school busses have ads on them.

Re:Works For Me

[PitaBred]

I'll pay for education. I don't want to pay for the No Child Gets Ahead program bullshit, where half the money is pissed away on a minority of kids who'd be better served in vocational or other alternative education, instead of dragging everyone else down.

People don't trust the educational system because teachers have been hamstrung by lawsuits, the administration is a political bullshit quagmire (seriously... talk to any teacher you know about the administration of their school), and you can't get intelligent, capable people to teach because males are suspected of being closet child molesters simply for being men, and anyone who is on the fence about teaching goes into private enterprise because the personal risk is much lower, and the pay is the same if not better.

Oh, and further news in that case: http://blogs.pcworld.com/tipsandtweaks/archives/003741.html

Re:Works For Me

[tweek]

First off, we're not a democracy so that doesn't really matter.

Secondly, any government school system will always pale in comparison to a private one because the government is terrible at managing anything.

We've thrown how much money over the years at schools and what difference has it made? Not a whit. Government shouldn't be in the business of education anyway.

Re:Works For Me

[mewshi_nya]

Exactly. It's not how high my taxes are - it's what are my taxes used for?

You don't hear Finns bitch about their tax rate (nearly 50%) because, thanks to PROPER investment in education (read "Just for Fun" sometime, it actually provides a good explanation of the way in which the Finnish education system works), they have a higher standard of living than most Americans.

I can tell you *exactly* why politicians don't put a priority on funding education: the effects of a change to the education system won't be felt for at least a decade, sometimes even more. They want something that they can use to get people voting for them; crime decreasing (whether or not it's a cause-and-effect relationship); getting rid of those nasty child predators (or at least appearing to); cutting taxes (or making it look like they did).

Re:Works For Me

[Forrest Kyle]

"but he is also making a very loud statement to the government to pull its head out of its ass and appropriate more education funding."

His statement is as ridiculous as it is loud. America spends more money on public education than any other country on earth, and has some of the worst scores. In the last 15 years, education spending has doubled, and test scores have steadily declined.

Our schools don't need more money. They need to start teaching hard core reading, writing, math, science, and critical thinking and stop appropriating gigantic school bonds to build football stadiums and soccer fields. They need to spend 0 hours per day talking about cultural diversity and 100% of their time learning hard facts and skills that will improve their minds and equip them to be successful.

Re:Works For Me

[nschubach]

nobody wants to pay for education

That's the problem. Nobody wants to pay for it even though their children are the ones using it. They'd rather make everyone else pay for it.

If schools were run like businesses, they'd be competing for your dollar and offering an education you approve of for your children. Parents might actually start paying attention to what their kids are learning as well instead of sending them off to a public funded babysitting service while they go to work. The schools would have to manage money, maintain a high standard of learning and make the most out of what they have instead of constantly asking for more. If you find the school is teaching your kids about something you don't approve of, send them to a competitor. We kind of have that now with private schools (like Catholic Schools) but the people going to these schools are also paying for the public schools as well. Most people don't like having to pay twice so the public schools have an unfair monopolistic advantage. Remove school taxation but create a law that their children must be educated up to at least a standard set of guidelines and you'll see a drastic improvement in education levels.

Of course, people will complain that it's a shock to all the parents who have multiple kids in school. I ran the numbers in another story and it could cost less than $10 a school day and less than $2000 a year. This is less than most people spend to eat daily. The taxes have already been reduced for those with kids... where's this money going? They get a standard deduction of anywhere between $850 to $5150 per dependent not counting your own single deduction of $5K-7.5K. So why then do we not have money? People are living outside their means because they've counted on this yearly return or they spend it on jetskis, TVs and other items that they think they need. Don't tell me your tax return plus MAYBE a little set aside from your paycheck wouldn't cover $2k in child education...

Sure, out of the gate, schools will be meeting the minimum levels set, but they will soon start to edge each other out and over time it will change. You could even upgrade the education levels from time to time based on learning curves.

Re:Works For Me

[sumdumass]

Programs like the No child left behind was designed to address the failures of the politics. The schools just aren't answerable or accountable to anyone. The NCLBA is designed to measure the knowledge of the teachers, the progress of the students and to offer alternatives when they fail. The biggest problem with the NCLBA is the attitudes of the teachers who are being made accountable for once. They are dead set against it because it actually points a finger at them.

There are many misconceptions about the NCLBA. Because I have said something you will probably see a lot of them posted here. I'll point most of them out when it happens.

Re:Works For Me

[sumdumass]

In my opinion (and apparently also in the opinion of a large portion of the US population), education is a clear and obvious interpretation of "provide for the general welfare".

Your opinion would be completely wrong. The federal government does not operate any public education. They assist in public education provided by the states. There is no constitutional warrant for a public education and there never has been. Jefferson knew this and didn't attempt to start his public education efforts until after he was president and gone even though his previous private school attempt failed too (before he was president).

And while the constitutionality of the government providing education has not been challenged directly as far as I can find (Systems of public education in the US have existed since before the US did, dating back to the 1640s.), it can be considered implicitly constitutional due to various caselaw concerning aspects of it, such as Pierce v. Society of Sisters.

The constitutionality of education isn't a matter of the federal constitution. It is of the state constitutions and the laws within them. Our founding fathers (Thomas Jefferson included who was the first popular spokesman for a public education system) knew the constitution gave no right for it in the federal constitution. I'll get to your suggestion of case law in a minute.

Anyways, the Old Deluder Satan Act of 1647 decrees that every town of at least 50 families hire a schoolmaster who would teach the town's children to read and write and that all towns of at least 100 families should have a Latin grammar school master who will prepare students to attend Harvard College. This is a state law in Massachusetts which pushed the responsibility onto the towns. Most all other laws until the mid to late 1800's did the same. After the declaration of independence, 7 of the new states had constitutions that provided something for education. Jefferson's attempt at public education in DC used public donations as it's means of funding. The feds didn't get involved in public education until around the Morrill Acts of 1862 and 1890 in which is funded universities to make them accessible to more people. They were still private and public education was and is controlled by the states. The US government is not directly involved in education. All they do is perform research and statistical analysis concerning education and provide grants to states for their public schools. The No Child Left Behind Act did little more then supply an amount of funding for failing schools if the states set requirements for the student's education and tested to see that they were meeting them. Participation in it is completely voluntary by the state.

The case law and lawsuits you mention are a little misleading at first glance. In the Pierce v. Society of Sisters case, it was Oregon State schools operated under state law that when the law was changed violated a provision of the US constitution. This doesn't mean the US constitution demands the schools or that it even speaks to them. It means that something happened with the schools that went counter to the constitution. Traditionally, the city and local governments were responsible for the schools. Then people who lived too far from the towns started getting left out so the counties took over. Even when the state mandated the education, it left it to the locals to achieve. Then most of the state built the public education into their constitutions which in turn guarantee a public education by the state but not the feds.

Intellectual Property, eh?

[HTH NE1]

I put my copyright notice next to every answer.

Doesn't work so well on the scantron forms though.

Re:Intellectual Property, eh?

[HarvardAce]

I put my copyright notice next to every answer.

Doesn't work so well on the scantron forms though.

Simple...just fill in the "C" bubble every time. Besides, everyone knows that the answer is usually C.

Re:Intellectual Property, eh?

[millerjl]

My high school students bitterly complained that I never gave them multiple choice tests in my chemistry class. So I gave them one. All the answers were "B". They never complained again that year. It was most excellent!

Re:Intellectual Property, eh?

[habig]

Give them a multiple choice test where some, all, or none of the answers might be correct, rather than the usual "process of elimination" mode. To get the question right, you need to have filled in exactly all the right answers and none of the wrong ones.

While still easy for teachers to grade, students quickly learn to appreciate the "write out your work" tests!

Re:Intellectual Property, eh?

[Anonymous Coward]

A chemistry test where the answer to every question is boron? either it was a short test or you are much more creative than I am.

Re:Intellectual Property, eh?

[winwar]

I had a college calculus teacher who gave a multiple choice test (for some reason many in the class wanted it). For most questions you could choose A through M or so.....

In other words, if you didn't know the answer, it didn't help....

Kind of neat to see.

American Greed: Pay your damn taxes!!

[Drake42]

If people weren't so hell bent on not paying taxes we wouldn't have this problem. I hear people say "I don't have kids, why should I pay for school tax"

Guess what? You went to a school? You PAY for a school! Otherwise, go live in a third world country.

Did you know that in California it takes a 2/3rds majority to raise taxes but only a 51/49 vote to spend more money??? Now we're having massive teacher and police layoffs because republican assholes and cheating democrats aren't willing to man up and pay their dues.

I love paying taxes.
I use them to buy civilization.

Re:American Greed: Pay your damn taxes!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Schools get a fuckton of money as it is. I have been to many public schools and a common theme is mismanagement of money to buy unnecessary perks for the admin staff or show-off stuff for the district bureaucrats.

Alot of money could be freed from other government programs that are totally wasteful and unnecessary as well.

The biggest problem with your post is the idea that culture and civilization are things to be "bought". That is demonstrative of the materialist mentality that exists in society.

Re:American Greed: Pay your damn taxes!!

[geekoid]

All people benefit from an educated society. Like all things, the cost for education goes up. If the money they get doesn't match, education gets worse.

The fact that you moved is irrelevant to the posters point.

"nd yeah, we pay too much for too little."
DO you have any clue how much education costs? IS it even within your simple mind to comprehend the fact that the job you have depends on other people being educated? That you pay less from crime when the populace is educated?

Some public schools suck, but many of them do not suck. In fact, there are multitudes of private schools that are worse then public schools.

I suggest you look into the budget and results.

Coincidentally, ANOTHER report came out recently showing how public workers get more work done, are more efficient, and effective the the private sector contractors.

Re:American Greed: Pay your damn taxes!!

[rengav]

While I agree that there is tremendous waste in Public School Administration, I strongly disagree with your statement, "Schools get a fuckton of money as it is."

If you take a look at:
http://www.epodunk.com/top10/per_pupil/index.html

You will see that most states spend less than $10000 per year per student, before the current economic downturn and budget cuts. One thing that is not accounted for in this information is that it assumes perfect attendance. For every day that a student is not on campus in class, the school loses money. A parent who pulls their kid from school to make a long weekend or to make Thanksgiving a week long vacation instead of the 4-5 day weekend that most schools take is taking money out of the hands of the school.

I also noticed that some of your are under the misconception that teachers are paid enough as it is. Yes, teachers are paid a living wage. However compared to their peers with similar education, job experience, and job responsibility, teachers of all levels are grossly underpaid. This remains true even when you factor in all of the "vacation" time that teachers get. Most teachers I know (and I am one too, former High School, now Adjunct Professor), work in one way or another during these so-called vacation times. During Thanksgiving and Xmas break, most catch up on grading, plan for the coming term, etc. Many during summer break, take classes to keep their certifications, or teach summer school to make ends meet.

Do not ever think that all teachers have it soft. Most teachers are very dedicated caring involved individuals, it's the few that make the news that give the rest a bad name.

Re:American Greed: Pay your damn taxes!!

[Neoprofin]

I'll grant you that there can be educated people without public education but I dare you to tell me, since you're curious what the argument is that an educated public benefits everyone, do you have an argument as to how an uneducated populace would in any way be more beneficial? The arguments for a society where all members are provided the basic foundation to be skilled and competent employees through training in math and literacy seem pretty obvious to me. Throw in some history as a good civics lesson and I honestly don't see how you can say education doesn't benefit the society by preparing them to function productively as adults.

Obviously good parenting is also a factor, but there's nothing a school can do to fix people not taking any responsibility for the wellbeing of their children. It's nice of you to bring up that you don't feel like you have enough control. Well tough shit, welcome to America. You don't decide where they build roads, what laws are passed, where your tax money goes, who gets hired to non-elected positions the list goes on forever. If you want complete control of the next generation have a child and raise them well. Home school them if you like. Yes, you still have to pay property taxes even if your child isn't getting the money, but you also get to reap the rewards of the tax money and labor those students will later produce.

Boohoo

[internerdj]

If you can't be bothered to support your schools well enough that the teachers can print out tests, then you shouldn't be pissed the instructor is having to subject your child to ads to be able to afford to print the tests. This isn't even the teachers getting a (well deserved) raise, this is about not having the supplies that directly contribute to your child's education.
Ads on tests. Bad prescedant? Yes.
Can't be bothered to do anything for your child's education outside taxes? Worse prescedant? Yes.

Re:Boohoo

[Quiet_Desperation]

Bad prescedant?

So... how bad were the budget cuts in *your* school?

Re:Boohoo

[internerdj]

Teachers in my state get paid very poorly, but hey we have one of the lowest property taxes of any state. Yay priorities. :-/

Re:Boohoo

[merreborn]

this is about not having the supplies that directly contribute to your child's education

We have one of the highest per-student education spending rates in the world, and yet so little of that money ends up going where it's actually needed -- to competent teachers and classroom supplies.

D.C., specifically, is an amazing example of waste:

D.C. spent about $13,400 per student in 2006, which was only exceeded by New York and New Jersey.

Despite the city's high per-student spending, scores on math and reading were the lowest in the country last year, according to results of the National Assessment of Educational Progress tests.

To make matters worse, less than half of that money is actually going to instruction; most of it goes to administration, with 14 administrators raking in at least $150,000 per year.

We've doubled education spending but test scores haven't improved at all:

And while many people say, "We need to spend more money on our schools," there actually isn't a link between spending and student achievement.

Jay Greene, author of "Education Myths," points out that "If money were the solution, the problem would already be solved ... We've doubled per pupil spending, adjusting for inflation, over the last 30 years, and yet schools aren't better."

He's absolutely right. National graduation rates and achievement scores are flat, while spending on education has increased more than 100 percent since 1971. More money hasn't helped American kids.

Much of the money never makes it to our children; instead it goes to tenured incompetents who only bother to show up to work for the paycheck, useless bureaucrats, and other waste.

World's highest per-student spending rates, and yet our teachers can't afford to make photocopies. How the hell did we get here?

Oblig.

[Nazlfrag]

If you have three Pepsis and drink one, how much more refreshed are you?

Re:Oblig.

[Killer Orca]

Zero. Pepsis aren't refreshing.

Re:Oblig.

[SparkleMotion88]

"Who can tell me the atomic weight of bolognium?"

Re:Oblig.

[Kawolski]

Pepsi.

Partial credit!

Awesome!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

This is a great idea! Young people LOVE taking tests and the next time they go past Bennys Burger(TM) they are guaranteed to think that is THE place to go! Soon methods like trying to associate your brand with cool music or a sports star will be history.

Sponsored by Bennys Burger Inc(TM).

RB?

[Goldsmith]

This is Rancho Bernardo? That's not exactly the inner city. Maybe charge $2 more per seat at the football games and have a properly funded Calc class.

Hmmm....

[TripMaster Monkey]

I wonder if you could take out an "ad" with certain calculus notes buried within it...like having the Ideal Gas Equation or Hooke's Law as a tiny part of a graphic... ^_^

I can see it now...

[get quad]

This test brought to you by CDABCCDACDBBACCADBC and the bonus question is 42.

The Next Test...

[HarvardAce]

While not a bad idea, the implementation could be much better...Picture this test:

1) McDonald's $2 Big Mac contains two all-beef patties that are cylinders of height 0.5cm and diameter 5cm. Burger King's $3 whopper contains two beef-like substances that are cylinders of height 0.3cm and diameter 4.5cm. How many more times valuable is the Big Mac versus the Whopper, assuming a sandwich's value is directly proportional to the amount of beef (or beef-like substance) in it?

2) A Subway Sweet Onion Chicken Teriyaki 6" sub contains 250 kcal of lean, healthy energy. A Wendy's Baconator contains 975 kcal of thigh-hugging and gut-enlarging fat. If all the energy of these sandwiches were put into a 100kg person climbing a ladder, how much higher would the 100kg person have to climb in order to use up all the energy (assuming all energy spent is put into the potential energy from climbing)?

The possibilities are endless! We'd never have to worry about education funding again!

Re:The Next Test...

[holychicken]

Too bad the end is a very scary place:

1) CHvEApP_VIiAoGRzA costs 1.59$ per dose. 1 dose enlarges a 100mL penis by 10%. How much money for CHvEApP_VIiAoGRzA would one need to increase their 95mL penis the same amount gained by the P3|\|I$ eNlARg|\/|EnT that one could buy for 10$?

Re:The Next Test...

[Muad'Dave]

...assuming all energy spent is put into the potential energy from climbing?

And assuming the person that ate the Baconator didn't have a heart attack on the way up the ladder.

Could be worse

[Gre7g]

I know I should really hate that he's doing this, but I don't. It's kind'a nice.

Sure beats what my EE lab prof did... he stapled McDonald's applications to a final and shouted "None of you will ever be electrical engineers! Yer' gonn'a need that last page..."

Man, what a bastard.

So wrong

[swordgeek]

This is so utterly wrong that I honestly feel sick. If this is happening, then it means that society as a whole has failed at one of its three primary purposes. Capitalism has gone from a financial model to a political one, and now a societal one.

Not a problem...

[MiniMike]

As soon as I can download cut-out overlay patterns from Adblock...

Re:Not terrible

[swordgeek]

I'd say that this *IS* terrible, and that your response proves it.

Schools, first and foremost, shouldn't be a profit centre. Secondly, they shouldn't be even thought of in terms of profit/loss, or fiscal sustainability. If you're going to put financial terms on a school, then it is a cost centre, plain and simple. You put money into it because you need it, not in order to get money back out of it (directly).

Of course, you need to justify your costs. Boards are set up for that--"We need this much money for these educational tools and programs, and this is how it will get used." That's the price of living in a money-driven economy.

Putting ads on educational materials creates so many more inadvertent lessons: Society doesn't value education; your only important role in life is as a consumer; knowledge is only worthwhile if it has direct practical benefits; the list goes on.

"I don't mean full on advertising like blaring announcements between classes with videos to boot, but maybe corporate funded text books..."

There is no difference. There is NO DIFFERENCE between corporate funding of books, ads on exam papers, and non-stop ads over the PA system, except for volume.

The thing to keep in mind is that companies don't buy ad space out of the good of their hearts--they do it because they can make a profit, and the way they make a profit is by getting the viewer (i.e. the students or their parents) to buy their product.

Besides which, advertising in schools is generally illegal in the US--the vending companies have managed to circumvent it, as have the dirtbags at Channel 1. The result is that parents are fighting, and in some cases winning.

Re:...OR TURNITIN.com (appeal this week)

[teh moges]

I hope it gets modded down.

I agree with your cause, but not your method. Post a new story with information about the trial, as there are lots of people here (I imagine) that want to hear about this. Posting a comment in a story that doesn't relate is going to reduce your audience, not increase it. You can even post your story anonymously if you wish.

Re:Reductio ad absurdum

[mewshi_nya]

Actually, since I'm an economics major, I want to have a paper on this exact topic at some point:

All these programs, like health care, welfare (when used PROPERLY), education (up to and include university), have a HUGE economic impact on the US.

If we get the kind of return prison rehab programs get (1.70-3.50 dollars saved for every dollar spent), then we can VERY easily regain our edge by just investing PROPERLY in education.

We don't invest properly in education, i know, bizarre concept!

Re:...OR TURNITIN.com (appeal this week)

[profplump]

Google only indexed published material that (except in the case of error) is intended to be publicly available. When turnitin stops indexing the unpublished material that students submitted in private as part of their eduction you can have your analogy back.