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.
There is no way to do this job in 27 to 30 hours a week. That would be zero prep, no time before/after school, no prep hour and zero time spent grading. Even seasoned teachers have prep time updating lesson plans, grading papers and just making copies for kids in classes and then there are things like after school tutoring.
My contract hours are 40 hours a week. We have 7 hour day and I'm required to be here half an hour before/after school. Classes are 52 minutes long and I get one prep period and a 23 minute lunch per day. My prep us usually spent cleaning up the lab, setting up/tearing down labs or making copies. I stay an hour and a half after school because I have kids in my room for the first 30-60 minutes after school for tutoring (my subjects are not easy). Then I go home, grade papers and write lesson plans.
I want to know where this person teachss that they work 27-30 hours a week.
I do have a friend who comes close. She teaches at an, exclusived, prep school. She teaches four classes and they give her a prep hour for each prep she has so she teaches 4 classes and has 2 preps every day. She does have to sponsor two after school programs per year though so there are times she works longer hours. Her class sizes are small (15 students per class) so she has less than half the grading I have. Her case is very rare though. Most of us teach 5-7 classes a day, have upwards of 30 kids in our classes and are lucky if we get one prep hour a day.
As to time off, we do get two weeks at Christmas. I don't know why we're not going until the 23rd this year. We get 3 days for mid winter break and 6 for spring break. Other than that, we get labor day and memorial day. The kids get several other holidays we are required to work. For example, they get MLK day while we have in service.
This is taken from if i end up teaching in europe, and scandinavia. A friend of mine is biology / geography teacher for 12-17 year old. And she works right now 23 hours a week. Though normally it is 26-28. She goes to school at 9:00 and gets home at 15:00, And got an hour or so free in the middle of the day depending on how many hours she have.
Some teachers here take additional hours as substitute once in a while for some spare money, but it's not needed.
And the vacation is as i wrote in my first post, you can even add more odd days which i can't remember all of them.
This is my view on teaching, and how it works where i come from. So i'm not saying it is like this in america, but america isn't the whole world. So teaching to me is indeed, This .
It's hell the first two years with all the prep and such, but after you spent time doing it you can copy most of your work, and got a stable plan to follow. The only time consuming part is the grading in itself, but that's not all full-time thing. That's just at the end of the season. This all depends on what work you have aswell, which age group and so on.
[Edited] : I did not count in your work at home to the 20 something - 30 hours a week. As it's not something you go through each week.
$6,700 per student really does not sound like a very high number.
Oh, I disagree. Private schools produce a superior result for a fraction of the cost. Money isn't the issue. If it was about money, public schools would be producing Einsteins and Edisons, one after the other.
Vouchers are the way to go. Let the crappy schools die and let the good schools thrive. And let the crappy teachers find themselves jobless and let the good teachers get paid based on results - just as it is in the real world.
And I still think teachers should be required to have a certain mastery of basic punctuation and rudimentary writing skills. You can get muddle through life without Calculus and advanced science courses, but you're just going to look like a pitiable, uneducated fool if you can't speak and/or write in coherent and complete sentences.
Oh, I disagree. Private schools produce a superior result for a fraction of the cost. Money isn't the issue. If it was about money, public schools would be producing Einsteins and Edisons, one after the other.
Vouchers are the way to go. Let the crappy schools die and let the good schools thrive. And let the crappy teachers find themselves jobless and let the good teachers get paid based on results - just as it is in the real world.
And I still think teachers should be required to have a certain mastery of basic punctuation and rudimentary writing skills. You can get muddle through life without Calculus and advanced science courses, but you're just going to look like a pitiable, uneducated fool if you can't speak and/or write in coherent and complete sentences.
Sorry, but it's true.
Rose
Considering that in most school districts (all, perhaps?) 80+% of per-pupil funds go to teachers and other staff, are you saying teachers should make less? It's well known that teachers in pvt schools get paid less and have fewer benefits. The Catholic schools make some use of priests and nuns, who have taken a vow of poverty!
Private schools produce a superior result for a fraction of the cost. Money isn't the issue. If it was about money, public schools would be producing Einsteins and Edisons, one after the other.
Private schools also have the advantage of not having to educate students who cost more to educate. If a kid needs too many costly interventions or can't keep up with the work or is disruptive or needs special services the private school can and will refer that student back to a public school. Not to mention that private schools also by their very nature attract parents who care about education, or at least care enough to actively seek out a school that works for their child. Some kids cost more to educate than others.
Considering that in most school districts (all, perhaps?) 80+% of per-pupil funds go to teachers and other staff, are you saying teachers should make less? It's well known that teachers in pvt schools get paid less and have fewer benefits. The Catholic schools make some use of priests and nuns, who have taken a vow of poverty!
Actually, Catholic schools use few priests or nuns except in administrative positions. There's a shortage of priests, nuns, and brothers in this country, and it's hard enough staffing the churches.
Nor do all religious take a vow of poverty.
Private schools also have the advantage of not having to educate students who cost more to educate. If a kid needs too many costly interventions or can't keep up with the work or is disruptive or needs special services the private school can and will refer that student back to a public school. Not to mention that private schools also by their very nature attract parents who care about education, or at least care enough to actively seek out a school that works for their child. Some kids cost more to educate than others.
True to a point. Private schools accepting some federal funds have less of a free hand in admissions policies. And many IEP-based interventions cost the public school nothing....yet they still receive federal funds to offset the perceived extra cost of educating those children.
The inherent problem with both vouchers and charters is that while there are parents who CHOOSE to use those tools available to them, there would be just as many who couldn't/can't be bothered and will send their kid to the neighborhood school because its easy/close, creating a two-tiered education system. Someone HAS to teach those students whether or not their parents cared to send them someplace "better". How would those of you advocating for incentive-pay decide how those teachers get paid?
Oh, I disagree. Private schools produce a superior result for a fraction of the cost. Money isn't the issue. If it was about money, public schools would be producing Einsteins and Edisons, one after the other.
Vouchers are the way to go. Let the crappy schools die and let the good schools thrive. And let the crappy teachers find themselves jobless and let the good teachers get paid based on results - just as it is in the real world.
And I still think teachers should be required to have a certain mastery of basic punctuation and rudimentary writing skills. You can get muddle through life without Calculus and advanced science courses, but you're just going to look like a pitiable, uneducated fool if you can't speak and/or write in coherent and complete sentences.
Sorry, but it's true.
Rose
Private schools tend to be groups of like minded students with like minded parents and peers and parents have more to do with whether or not students succeed than schools. Private schools also tend to not pay their teachers. Many of the teachers at my son's private school considered working there a form of charity work. A service to God if you will. Which is great if you can afford to do it.
However, I do agree that $6700/student ought to be enough to pay teacher's decently. My school gets the same state monies a district school gets yet I'd start at $6K more than I'm making now in a district and I'd get raises every year until I tipped out at something over twice what I'm making now. Yet, what I make now will be my salary when I leave, IF I'm lucky. They think nothing of cutting our wages when there are budget cuts.
I believe the money is there. If the districts can pay their teachers, AND contribute to the state pension AND the legacy costs of pensions being paid out, why can't the charters pay their teachers? Where does the money go? While charters don't get infrastructure monies from a community, they also don't pay pensions or pay into the state pension fund.
Actually, Catholic schools use few priests or nuns except in administrative positions. There's a shortage of priests, nuns, and brothers in this country, and it's hard enough staffing the churches.
Nor do all religious take a vow of poverty.
Regardless, private schools pay less, and offer lesser benefits. They also, as has been pointed out, don't have to take anyone they don't want to take, e.g. special ed students. In addition, some have "endowments"; some do extensive fund raising and have large expectations of parent volunteer work.
Vouchers are the way to go. Let the crappy schools die and let the good schools thrive. And let the crappy teachers find themselves jobless and let the good teachers get paid based on results - just as it is in the real world.
There are teachers in schools who are not very good, yet their students score well because of their background knowledge and parental support. There are also great teachers who have students who score poorly because the students are not motivated and there is no parental support.
I say you can't compare working with students to, as you put it, "the real world". It isn't like sales where two employees are selling the same exact product, or manufacturing where we are working with the same materials.
An excellent teacher in a bad situation (poor student attendance, lack of materials, crumbling infrastructure, hungry and tired students, lack of parental support, etc.) may work much harder than an average teacher in a great situation (two parent families, good attendance, parent involvement, background knowledge, etc.), but the scores of the students in the bad situation may not increase. Is that teacher a crappy teacher? You can lead them to water, but you can't make them drink.
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.
teachers
