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.
Ivorytickler, don't feel guilty, go after a better opportunity if it becomes available. This coming from one who is high on committment. Especially after reading that teachers have to spend their own money for school supplies.
I do not blame your husband; if your school does not purchase supply he shouldn't either.
Over the years as difficult as it was for me, I have learned to not take my work home. I will work hard and give it all at work, but it stays at work. This is especially the case when in the past during a planning period, or from time to time I may be asked to cover a class for a teacher that is absent for a period, or something that it is not in my job description, while at the same time delaying important duties that I am responsible for. What do I do? I prioritize. I take care of the most important thing that is expected, then the next and so on. Always giving the children the time and attention when in my class.
Back in the days I will rack my brains at work and at home, and even plan and work at home. But you know what, when a supervisor/boss wants to get rid of you, or they need to downsize, they could care less about all the time and dedication that you have put in, you are gone.
At the present time my approach is to work hard today, be a team player today, and be loyal and help my organization or school as much as I can within reason as long as I am employed today. However, I have begun to put limits to how far I will go. I will not sacrifice important family functions or childrens events like I may have in the past. Unlike in the past, I do not have illusions that I will be working at my present job in 3, 5, or 10 years. I take it 1 year at a time, and I will work hard every year that I am there.
Administration change, supervisors change, and the feeling towards you or me as an employee may change.
In recent years I have come to look at work situations realistically and with open eyes.
Let me reiterate, again: you are ignoring your own words. So, let me play them back for you:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivorytickler
One of the reasons I want to make a job change is I want to be somewhere where I can make a long term, personal, committment. I like to grow roots. I can't do that where I am. I'm not as effective as I could be because of that.
I didn't write that. You did. You have one foot out the door, emotionally.
This is not "I have to have something left for my family," though you keep trying to paint it that way.
This is "I (Ivory) am unwilling to commit as much of myself to these students, because I am planning to leave them. They do not get my best teaching."
Is it ethical for a bank teller to leave their customers?
For a pharmacist to leave their customers?
For a police officer to leave their citizens?
For an insurance agent? A chef? A government worker?
No- and it shouldn't be for a teacher, either.
Everyone's first loyalty to should be to their family. If a better opportunity comes up, it is incumbent on that person to take it- in my opinion.
Ivorytickler, don't feel guilty, go after a better opportunity if it becomes available. This coming from one who is high on committment. Especially after reading that teachers have to spend their own money for school supplies.
I do not blame your husband; if your school does not purchase supply he shouldn't either.
Over the years as difficult as it was for me, I have learned to not take my work home. I will work hard and give it all at work, but it stays at work. This is especially the case when in the past during a planning period, or from time to time I may be asked to cover a class for a teacher that is absent for a period, or something that it is not in my job description, while at the same time delaying important duties that I am responsible for. What do I do? I prioritize. I take care of the most important thing that is expected, then the next and so on. Always giving the children the time and attention when in my class.
Back in the days I will rack my brains at work and at home, and even plan and work at home. But you know what, when a supervisor/boss wants to get rid of you, or they need to downsize, they could care less about all the time and dedication that you have put in, you are gone.
At the present time my approach is to work hard today, be a team player today, and be loyal and help my organization or school as much as I can within reason as long as I am employed today. However, I have begun to put limits to how far I will go. I will not sacrifice important family functions or childrens events like I may have in the past. Unlike in the past, I do not have illusions that I will be working at my present job in 3, 5, or 10 years. I take it 1 year at a time, and I will work hard every year that I am there.
Administration change, supervisors change, and the feeling towards you or me as an employee may change.
In recent years I have come to look at work situations realistically and with open eyes.
Thanks.
I really don't think sacrificing self and family is in the job description. I can be a good teahcer without eating, drinking and breathing teaching. You can be dedicated while working without allowing work to, negatively, impact your family. I choose to work to live not live to work but I have a life outside of work that is very important to me. I cut into that more than I should as things are.
I really wish I had a future where I am. I like the kids and, surprisingly, a few seem to like me. The demographis is one I relate to because I grew up poor. I won't put my kids in that position though. I owe them better than that and someday, if not now, I'll find it. It's really just a matter of being in the right place at the right time.
It's hard when you know you can't stay but you're right. Even if this were what I thought were the perfect job, there's no guarantee they wouldn't downsize me out next year. This past spring, they let a teacher go who had been at the school for 5 years, which is a long time for our school. They just told her they were going a different direction, whatever that means. You'd think after 5 years they'd owe her more of an explanation.
Let me reiterate, again: you are ignoring your own words. So, let me play them back for you:
I didn't write that. You did. You have one foot out the door, emotionally.
This is not "I have to have something left for my family," though you keep trying to paint it that way.
This is "I (Ivory) am unwilling to commit as much of myself to these students, because I am planning to leave them. They do not get my best teaching."
I'm not ignoring my own words. I'm working towards making what I want reality. One thing I don't like about being in a position that pays lousy is not being able to grow roots. I like roots. You can't grow roots where you can't stay. I can't stay.
And yes, I don't feel right leading the kids to believe I'm staying when I'm not. I don't feel it would be right to encourage bonds I won't be there to support. Personally, I like roots and I like feeling I belong. It makes me more comfortable with what I do. More willing to take risks. However, that doesn't mean I don't do my job well and it doesn't mean I'm not the best candidate for the job. They picked me for a reason. They could have picked someone else.
You act like there is something wrong with me because I realize I can't stay in a low paying job for very long . What's so hard for you to understand here? I can't afford this job. Period. It's better than no job but I can't stop looking because it won't work long term for my family. I'm not sure what you're not getting here.
One thing you are missing is that teachers don't stay in this school. When I leave, I'll be replaced by someone who will leave in a few years when they find someting better and they will be replaced by someone who will leave in a few years. You think I should bow out now and subject my family to unemployment so the kids at this school can move on to the next teacher who will just leave in 3 years????? That makes no sense. Not feeling I can do the best job I can here and being the best person for the job right now are not mutually exclusive.
Yes, I think being somewhere where I can put down roots will help me to become a better teacher. Just being around long enough to have known the older siblings of students goes a long way. That's something I'll never have here. I'd go broke if I stuck around that long. I'll be here 1 or 2 more years at most. After that, I'll find anything that pays better and has benefits. I'll have to.
You keep trying to make the fault mine when it's the administration that refuses to pay teachers what they are worth. So you get a long string of teachers who come for a while and leave. Some will leave in the summer and some will leave after school starts but the vast majority will leave. They make it impossible to stay.
I'm curious though. Are you paid union scale? Or did you choose to go broke teaching? Did you ask your kids to forego college funds? Did you do without a pension or a retirement fund to be where you are?
Last edited by Ivorytickler; 09-02-2009 at 09:13 PM..
(I'm going to guess you make a pretty good living and have decent benefits. Even if you chose to go broke working in low paying districts, that is your choice. It's not required.)
I already answered this, but I am sure you ignored it.
I make a good enough living to be comfortable most of the time, and have no benefits in my current position.
I'm not going broke. Nor, I suspect, would you if you made different decisions about how to spend your money.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivorytickler
Saying you give your all is just self pontification.
*laughs*
Out of curiosity, what does that mean?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivorytickler
It's an unfortunate fact of life that some opportunities to achieve that goal will come after September 1st. If that happens, there is no requirement to martyr oneself.
I wouldn't be martyring myself. I would not view it as "a sacrifice" let alone a sacrifice of my life.
You would. The money lost would constitute a grievous injury to you. I get that. You really don't need to convince me further.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivorytickler
There are kids to be taught in the better paying school too and there are teachers out of work who will take the job in the lesser paying school until they too can find something reasonable. At the end of the day, the kids all get taught.
Just keep telling yourself that if it helps you to sleep.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivorytickler
I owe it to them to do this job to the best of my ability while standing in front of the classroom.
Yet, you have already granted that you don't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivorytickler
Teachers are not permanent fixtures in kids lives. They are transient and kids move on when teachers do. It's not the issue you make it out to be.
The red section is exactly the point.
And... your continued denial that having a teacher leave in the middle of the term has a negative impact on their learning is laughable.
Using logic, it's pretty obvious that having one teacher for X weeks and another for Y weeks, with a substitute for 36-(X+Y) is less good than having one teacher for 36 weeks, even ignoring, as you wish to, the emotional component.
They will get less instruction.
It's exactly the issue I make it out to be - not for every student but for plenty of them. Tell you what... I will run a poll, and see what the responses are - then paste them.
And yes, I don't feel right leading the kids to believe I'm staying when I'm not. I don't feel it would be right to encourage bonds I won't be there to support.
You keep trying to make the fault mine when it's the administration that refuses to pay teachers what they are worth.
Right.
You consciously, intentionally, do a less good job for these kids than you will (or would) for students in a wealthier school.
You keep trying to make it all the administration's fault when you AND they share responsibility for giving these students a lower quality of education.
I do not absolve the administration.
I just ask you to see that you contribute to the problem for the students.
If you simply said "Yes, these students would be less well off if I left in the middle of the term," I'd stop pushing, because you would be being honest.
I think there's a difference between leaving at the end of the school year and leaving in the middle. A teaching job is different than other jobs. That doesn't mean teachers should be required to sacrifice everything; it simply means than unless you have pressing reasons then I don't think it is ethical to leave in the middle of the academic year. When you sign up to teach you sign up to teach kids for that year.
I dont' fully understand the "teachers aren't replacable" argument, either. I agree that teachers can be replaced, and that kids will still be taught, but isn't that argument in itself diminishing the value and respect that teachers deserve? If teachers can just shuffle in and out without harming the kids (which I don't think is true) then why should society pay teachers what they're "worth," unless, of course, we think teachers aren't worth much at all?
I do value and respect teachers, which is both why I think they should be compensated fairly and should be respected for their work, but I also think it means that they should realize that their actions do have a direct impact on kids (which is why many people are drawn to teaching in the first place) and that contracts, whether formal or informal, should be taken seriously. There are some situations where it is reasonable to leave, but in most circumstances I don't think a middle-of-the-year pay raise is enough of a reason. You know what the pay and the benefits are when you leave a job; assuming that they don't change (which is a different story) then your willingness to take a teaching position should be seen as a willingness to work that school year. If it's obvious that the job is going to require "sacrifice" on the part of your family, then don't take that job. The reality is that in teaching your actions do have a direct impact on kids, so better to hold off on accepting the wrong teaching job and temp or find an office job or something while waiting for the right opportunity to come along.
I asked if having your teacher leave the high school to teach at another school for higher pay was something that interferes with their learning.
The options, with results (after 20 votes so far):
No, not really. (1 votes)
Initially, but not over the entire year. (1 votes)
If I like the teacher, yes. Otherwise, it wouldn't be. (2 votes)
It depends on how long the sub is teaching. (0 votes)Yes, it is disruptive to me. (16 votes)
Other (0 votes)
General thoughts include that if the teacher leaves in the first two weeks or last two weeks (assuming the tests match the course), that is not that bad. Otherwise, it can be quite disruptive. Also, knowing it is going to happen in advance helps a fair amount, said several - the example of a maternity leave, with the class having gotten to meet the replacement in advance - whereas abrupt is a lot harder.
Last edited by jps-teacher; 09-03-2009 at 12:04 AM..
I think there's a difference between leaving at the end of the school year and leaving in the middle. A teaching job is different than other jobs. That doesn't mean teachers should be required to sacrifice everything; it simply means than unless you have pressing reasons then I don't think it is ethical to leave in the middle of the academic year. When you sign up to teach you sign up to teach kids for that year.
I dont' fully understand the "teachers aren't replacable" argument, either. I agree that teachers can be replaced, and that kids will still be taught, but isn't that argument in itself diminishing the value and respect that teachers deserve? If teachers can just shuffle in and out without harming the kids (which I don't think is true) then why should society pay teachers what they're "worth," unless, of course, we think teachers aren't worth much at all?
I do value and respect teachers, which is both why I think they should be compensated fairly and should be respected for their work, but I also think it means that they should realize that their actions do have a direct impact on kids (which is why many people are drawn to teaching in the first place) and that contracts, whether formal or informal, should be taken seriously. There are some situations where it is reasonable to leave, but in most circumstances I don't think a middle-of-the-year pay raise is enough of a reason. You know what the pay and the benefits are when you leave a job; assuming that they don't change (which is a different story) then your willingness to take a teaching position should be seen as a willingness to work that school year. If it's obvious that the job is going to require "sacrifice" on the part of your family, then don't take that job. The reality is that in teaching your actions do have a direct impact on kids, so better to hold off on accepting the wrong teaching job and temp or find an office job or something while waiting for the right opportunity to come along.
No more than arguing that an engineer or a doctor can be replaced. What it takes is a certain set of skills not a certain person. It's the skills that are valuable and teachers who have developed more skills moving into better paying positions actually increases teacher's value in that it shows that greater skills = greater earning power and earning power is related to how society values what you do.
I realize my actions have direct impact on kids. I just don't believe a teacher leaving to take a better position mid year has devestating effects as long as there is someone qualified to take their place and even if there isn't, the bottom line is we owe ourselves and our families more than we owe a school that refuses to value us.
That said, I think teachers can (not a requirement for the job but this can happen) form special bonds with kids and they can, as a result of those bonds, positively impact their lives but so can other people who work with kids like pastors, doctors, nurses, Sunday school teachers and neighbors. But no one would call any of them undedicated because they chose to take a better job and leave. Why are teachers singled out here?
The notion I argue against is that the only time a teacher is allowed to take a different job is during the summer. I don't see much difference over not coming back in the fall and leaving in September except there will be an adjustment time when a new teacher is brought in but this happens all the time with things like maternity leaves. It's a common occurance and kids live through it. I think transitions are smoother at break points. Either early in the year or at mid year but they're transitions still the same. Some are harder than others.
I don't think it's right to argue that teachers are undedicated if they seek better employment opportunties when no one would say the same of a doctor, a nurse, a day care provider, or a host of other professions that serve the public. When someone you know and trust leaves, there's a transition but we deal with them because we give people the right to better themselves. I don't think teachers should be told they don't have that right except for during the summer when half the opportunties won't come in the summer. Why do we tell teachers they can't take advantage of half of the opportunities out there. IMO, THAT is devaluing teachers. It's reducing them to a service from being human beings.
In my case, I work where I do because I haven't been able to find something better, however, I will leave when I do find something better. I know how hard the job market is. I'd be a fool to turn down something that comes along in the next few months because it came along after the school year started.
That said, it would be nice if we had crystal balls and knew when opportunity would knock but we don't. Not taking an opportunity when it comes along may be something the teacher regrets for the rest of their lives. Exactly what is she protecting that is worth that? I'm probably going to regret not taking the job I was offered shortly after I took this one for a long time. I told myself something better would come along but here I am going back for another year at lower pay and benefits (in real dollars not just adjusted ones) than last year. There are few opportunties out there. If one bites me on the nose again, I'm gone.
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.
The demographis is one I relate to because I grew up poor. I won't put my kids in that position though. I owe them better than that and someday, if not now, I'll find it. It's really just a matter of being in the right place at the right time. 
. What's so hard for you to understand here? I can't afford this job. Period. It's better than no job but I can't stop looking because it won't work long term for my family. I'm not sure what you're not getting here. 
(1 votes)
(1 votes)
(2 votes)
(16 votes)
