Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
More pay and benefits to teachers doesn't equal a better education. More taxes doesn't equal better education.
Silverbullet summed it up best when he wrote:
"The biggest help on LI which grades is that there are a lot of educated people living in one area. COL makes sure of that. If you look at the lower income areas you get right back into the below par test scores, 1 mile away in a nicer area you have above par. Socioeconomic status is a huge boon to testing by all accounts I have ever looked at. Educated people are more likely to ensure their children are doing their homework, studying, and get extra help if needed. To say otherwise is showing a lack of understanding on the subject."
I totally agree socio-economic standing is a huge reason why schools on LI perform quite well. However, if you would take two districts with similar socio-economic standing (lets say both middle class) one on LI and the other elsewhere, chances are that the quality of education is going to be better on LI. Does that mean its always the case, and that very good middle class districts don't exist elsewhere? No, but for your average middle class district Long Island has among the highest quality of education in the country.
I totally agree socio-economic standing is a huge reason why schools on LI perform quite well. However, if you would take two districts with similar socio-economic standing (lets say both middle class) one on LI and the other elsewhere, chances are that the quality of education is going to be better on LI. Does that mean its always the case, and that very good middle class districts don't exist elsewhere? No, but for your average middle class district Long Island has among the highest quality of education in the country.
So why is that?
Maybe because people (and kids) on LI know, in the long run, you had better be on the ball or you will starve/freeze to death?
After all, we do not have abundant trailer parks where an SSI or welfare check will easily pay the rent and petty crime or working "off the books" will provide the rest if you choose NOT to follow middle class values, to crap out in school, be a druggie, drunk, etc. People HAVE to be able to do SOMETHING on LI to make ends meet, and kids can see that growing up, hence better performance in school. (Just a theory. Would like to see other theories too!)
Maybe because people (and kids) on LI know, in the long run, you had better be on the ball or you will starve/freeze to death?
After all, we do not have abundant trailer parks where an SSI or welfare check will easily pay the rent and petty crime or working "off the books" will provide the rest if you choose NOT to follow middle class values, to crap out in school, be a druggie, drunk, etc. People HAVE to be able to do SOMETHING on LI to make ends meet, and kids can see that growing up, hence better performance in school. (Just a theory. Would like to see other theories too!)
I think a big reason is how poorly teachers are paid in many parts of the country. In many parts of the country many qualified teachers either go elsewhere or into another profession because they can't afford to teach. Obviously on LI we have the other extreme (though I think the bigger problem is with administrative pay and pensions rather than teacher pay in itself)
Anyway, I do agree school taxes are out of hand. We do need to seriously address that and it starts with pensions and admin pay. And we probably can afford to cut teacher pay somewhat without hurting all that much. However, we need to keep in mind that if we are going to keep Long Island schools as generally being among the best in the country we can't go along with the bear bones approach and pay teachers scraps that seems to be eluded to in the op that goes on in many parts of the country,
Why are teachers all on the same payscale / step increase ? For Example why is a chemistry teacher making the same as the gym and health teacher ? The salaries should be based on their expertise. This is equivalent to the admin cleric being on the same payscale as the Controller of a company. You think that would make sense ?
Health is actually more relevant than subjects like Chem. But the real problem is that we tend to think of subjects that have "tests" as being more important. Personally, I would rather know the warning signs of cancer than know the difference between protons and electrons. Just my opinion...
Health is actually more relevant than subjects like Chem. But the real problem is that we tend to think of subjects that have "tests" as being more important. Personally, I would rather know the warning signs of cancer than know the difference between protons and electrons. Just my opinion...
I think the person was trying to make a point that teaching sciences and maths are a bit more intrusive then the liberal arts curriculum or fluff like gym/art.
The President of the United States makes 400K per year. These School Superintendents (that work about 200 days per year) apparently have greater responsibilities!
Syosset Central Schools Hankin, Carole Ndr $459,849
Valley Stream Central High School Bernstein, Marc F Ndr $437,779
Miller Place Union Free Schools Brindley, Grace J Ndr $403,393
I think the person was trying to make a point that teaching sciences and maths are a bit more intrusive then the liberal arts curriculum or fluff like gym/art.
I would agree with that, but I don't think you typically see the same type of salaries unless that gym teacher is also a coach.
For example, I can't speak for all schools, but I was looking up the salary levels for my old high school (Massapequa). Generally the Gym teachers who are making the same amount as some of the Science teachers, etc with similar years of service are those who have been coaching for many years as well (and in many cases with multiple Championships as well)
Why are teachers all on the same payscale / step increase ? For Example why is a chemistry teacher making the same as the gym and health teacher ? The salaries should be based on their expertise. This is equivalent to the admin cleric being on the same payscale as the Controller of a company. You think that would make sense ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverBulletZ06
I think the person was trying to make a point that teaching sciences and maths are a bit more intrusive then the liberal arts curriculum or fluff like gym/art.
These are good points regarding the unfairness of how teachers are currently paid, which I myself also mentioned several months ago. After all, it seems patently ridiculous on the face of it, for instance, that a high school teacher of advanced chemistry or calculus should be paid at the same rate as a first grade teacher of the same level of experience; the level of difficulty of their respective subjects are not analagous and shouldn't be treated as such. Moreover, it's also worth noting that the potential opportunities available in the private sector to those graduates with degrees in sciences and mathematics are far greater than those who are trained as kindergarten or gym teachers, for example.
These are good points regarding the unfairness of how teachers are currently paid, which I myself also mentioned several months ago. After all, it seems patently ridiculous on the face of it, for instance, that a high school teacher of advanced chemistry or calculus should be paid at the same rate as a first grade teacher of the same level of experience; the level of difficulty of their respective subjects are not analagous and shouldn't be treated as such. Moreover, it's also worth noting that the potential opportunities available in the private sector to those graduates with degrees in sciences and mathematics are far greater than those who are trained as kindergarten or gym teachers, for example.
I believe you're partially right in that a teacher of Chem or Math would make much more being a scientist in private industry than that person makes teaching.
However, a first grade teacher, IMO, has a much more difficult and more job with greater responsibilities than a HS Chem teacher in many respects. I just don't think you can say in general that this or that subject/specialty is harder than any other, and if harder, they deserve more pay.
A Prez of a Morgan Stanley or a Bear Sterns, for example, makes many times more than the Prez of the US. Is their job more difficult? Do they have greater responsibilities? No.
There's really no correlation between pay and difficulty of a job in our current society. Whether there should be or not is certainly open to discussion, but that's a subject that has been under discussion for many many decades.
P.S. Goukas. Recall that name fondly as an old time fan of the St. Joe Hawks!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
