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.
Your anecdotal info aside, I assure you that private school pay does not typically eclipse public school pay, although there are outliers.
That would even further prove that public teachers aren't underpaid, and in fact most likely overpaid when relative to their corporate brothers and sisters.
Not only can you, you have to. Just like different industries compare salaries. If my employee can go work for you for $10K more per year than I pay them, I have a problem!!! I have to decide if I want to keep my employee or let them go. To keep them, I need some incentive for them to stay. It might be wages or other perks I can give them but I have to look better than you do.
You are correct that teachers have no impact on revenue. THAT is the problem here. They are simply dividing up a pot with no consideration to the actual worth of the teacher in question. Fortunately, here in Michigan, a stepped wage system that rewards both years in service and advanced degrees is enough to keep most in teaching. There are those who want to take that away and I think it will be a disaster. Unfortunately, I came out to a bad economy, had to take a low paying charter school job to start and we're in step freezes now so I have no hope of staying in teaching because I can't meet my financial obligations. I've weathered all the low paying years I can so I'm headed back to industry as soon as dd#1 graduates or Michigan goes to school of choice. The only reason teaching looks better than industry right now is the perk of being able to enroll my children in the district. Fortunately, I'm worth a lot more in industry so I can make up for my education career not taking off as I'd planned in a hurry.
Mark Zuckerberg gave NJ $100 million dollars to solve the exact problem you discuss. Beyond just charter schools, the money is supposed to be used to research and transform failing school systems into successful ones. This includes attracting good teachers, making efficient use of funds, and being downright effective. I commend Mr. Zuckerberg on his approach on trying to change education.
If it were up to me, the system would be set up in a manner where teachers would want to get their PHD (through incentives) prior to entering the field and being compensated accordingly. But the system isn't set up for that.
The reality is some jobs are a nice 8-hours and some aren't and this is known ahead of time.
And some don't pay well and that's known ahead of time, too. When I got my degree in journalism and my first job as a newspaper reporter, I knew I'd be working some 14-hour days and some weekends, and that I'd be paid like crap (it was the early 80s, and journalism degrees were a dime a dozen; we all wanted to be the next Woodward or Bernstein). And that was OK (for awhile!) because working at a newspaper was something I wanted to do.
And I knew darn well that working at a community weekly or small town daily would pay much less than working at a larger newspaper in a larger city, where sometimes the reporters are members of the Guild. But I elected not to, so I could have more control over my work load and my hours.
We all have choices. Teachers don't choose to be teachers primarily because of the pay, hours or benefits. They do it because they enjoy teaching other people.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivorytickler
Why would you compare a teacher to a hotel manager? Everyone knows different careers pay differently. My dh has an MBA, works 45 hours a week and makes twice what I do. What's your point?
The point (which I think you're already aware of; not sure why you're even asking) is that teachers -- and hotel managers and UPS drivers and grocery store clerks and social workers -- are paid according to different industry standards and from different funding streams. The point, really, is that there's no point in comparing one profession to another.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivorytickler
It is not logical to compare a high school chemistry teacher to a hotel manager.
Now you're getting it! So why do teachers continue to do it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJBest
I think the problem with this discussion is that we're talking about degrees. And pay is not based off of degrees.
No, it isn't. My co-workers with MSWs and advanced counseling certificates, licensing and education make significantly less than I do with a BA. Their job is more difficult, more capricious, and more stressful. If they elect to get into upper management, they might crack $60,000; however, if they prefer to work in direct client contact, they're stuck.
But study after study shows paying more for teachers/schools/etc. does nothing to increase quality of education.
Perhaps school systems are incentiving the wrong thing? Paying more for an advance degree when it's not needed, and inflating an employees sense of self worth in the process?
Please post your studies.
Logically, underpaying teachers would not attract the highest quality individuals into teaching.
And some don't pay well and that's known ahead of time, too. When I got my degree in journalism and my first job as a newspaper reporter, I knew I'd be working some 14-hour days and some weekends, and that I'd be paid like crap (it was the early 80s, and journalism degrees were a dime a dozen; we all wanted to be the next Woodward or Bernstein). And that was OK (for awhile!) because working at a newspaper was something I wanted to do.
And I knew darn well that working at a community weekly or small town daily would pay much less than working at a larger newspaper in a larger city, where sometimes the reporters are members of the Guild. But I elected not to, so I could have more control over my work load and my hours.
We all have choices. Teachers don't choose to be teachers primarily because of the pay, hours or benefits. They do it because they enjoy teaching other people.
The point (which I think you're already aware of; not sure why you're even asking) is that teachers -- and hotel managers and UPS drivers and grocery store clerks and social workers -- are paid according to different industry standards and from different funding streams. The point, really, is that there's no point in comparing one profession to another.
Now you're getting it! So why do teachers continue to do it?
No, it isn't. My co-workers with MSWs and advanced counseling certificates, licensing and education make significantly less than I do with a BA. Their job is more difficult, more capricious, and more stressful. If they elect to get into upper management, they might crack $60,000; however, if they prefer to work in direct client contact, they're stuck.
FOR THE UMPTEENTH TIME...you compare them WHEN THEY ARE RELEVENT. There is no sense in comparing me to a hotel manager because I don't have a degree in hotel management and there is very little risk I'll leave to become one. I'm also not competing with the FedEx driver for his job. The hours they work and the pay they get are irrlevent to me. You'd compare me, personally, to a chemist/chemical engineer (I know I'm not a chemist but industry doesn't seem to realize that chemists and chemical engineers are not the same thing). THAT's the industry you need to compete with because that's the one I can go work in. You compare teaching to other jobs the teachers could take to find their value.
Is a nursing teacher worth less than a nurse?
Is a math teacher worth less than a mathematician?
Is a physics teacher worth less than an engineer?
Is an english teacher worth less than a Journalist?
Is a chemistry teacher worth less than a chemist?
If you want to attract and keep good teachers, the answer is NO! As things are now, those who can will more often go do than teach simply because doing pays better. I really didn't need a lot more than I have to stay in teaching but I can't get it so I can't stay. Fortunately, my consolation prize is doubling my salary over night... I'm glad I had the chance to do what I really wanted to for a while but it's kind of sad that the lack of competitive wages is driving me and others away from teaching.
Kansas City spent as much as $11,700 per pupil--more money per pupil, on a cost of living adjusted basis, than any other of the 280 largest districts in the country. The money bought higher teachers' salaries, 15 new schools, and such amenities as an Olympic-sized swimming pool with an underwater viewing room, television and animation studios, a robotics lab, a 25-acre wildlife sanctuary, a zoo, a model United Nations with simultaneous translation capability, and field trips to Mexico and Senegal. The student-teacher ratio was 12 or 13 to 1, the lowest of any major school district in the country.
The results were dismal. Test scores did not rise; the black-white gap did not diminish; and there was less, not greater, integration.
Do you feel teachers need to be the best and brightest we have to offer? I would say no. Average intelligence would suffice.
Bottom line: there are too many factors to say whether increased funding benefits schools. However, it seems pretty clear that we aren't going to make a real difference in results without dealing with societal conditions, not just what happens in the classroom.
Teaching high school mathematics requires completely different skills from working as a PhD research mathematician. Comparing the two is absurd, and encouraging math teachers to pursue doctorates would be idiotic.
Is a math teacher worth less than a mathematician?
Is a physics teacher worth less than an engineer?
Is an english teacher worth less than a Journalist?
Is a chemistry teacher worth less than a chemist?
If you want to attract and keep good teachers, the answer is NO!
I would say the answer is yes to all of those. I was worth less (MUCH less) as a flight instructor teaching others to fly than I am as a pilot flying those same people at an airline. In fact, the airline spent more money on me in the first 2 months of employment training me than I did getting all of my government certificates on my own.
I would say the answer is yes to all of those. I was worth less (MUCH less) as a flight instructor teaching others to fly than I am as a pilot flying those same people at an airline. In fact, the airline spent more money on me in the first 2 months of employment training me than I did getting all of my government certificates on my own.
You have my dream job. Is it true that you guys are only allowed to work 6 months per a year?
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.
Everyone knows different careers pay differently. My dh has an MBA, works 45 hours a week and makes twice what I do. What's your point?
So why do teachers continue to do it?
