526 Arizona teachers have already quit this year (private school, salary)

[phetaroi]

Originally Posted by Diane de Poitiers

Just a comment I wanted to make.......my mom retired from teaching a few years ago, and one of the reasons for that decision was because of heavy pressure from administrators to make sure that students performed work at "X Level".

This was a problem because administrators did NOT take into account students who had behavioral or learning problems, or might still be learning English. (and it would happen that my mom had several students who fit into one or more of those categories)

With mainstreaming, virtually all teachers have students with behavioral or "learning problem" students. They're no longer hidden in out-of-the way rooms. And yes, principals should be putting pressure on teachers to help all children.

[phetaroi]

Originally Posted by Burkmere

It means that higher teacher pay doesn't correlate to better educated students.

Raising teacher pay attracts better more and better candidates. THat's why back in the D.C. area there is a constant battle between Fairfax and Montgomery Counties with pay and benefits the key tools of battle. It's not whole ball game, but ti's a factor.

[Burkmere]

Originally Posted by payutenyodagimas

higher pay means you attract better professionals to at least give it a shot in trying to improve students. it may not work always but what else would you improve student performance? pay teachers minimum wage?

There's no proof that higher teacher pay significantly improves students' performance. Calfornia is an excellent example,. I don't have any answer as to what will other than it really has to start at home.

Don't get me started on the teacher salary thing, although maybe Arizona could use a boost. I was in California where teachers "working" 180 days a year can top out at well over 100k and retire and live high on the hog at 55 in "many" instances.

And teaching is very important, but it's also fairly easy to get a teaching certificate and teach, etc. Now I"ll be blasted, but it is no way as difficult as Med School, engineering, and many other disciplines...etc....and you can't convince me otherwise...hard to get fired, etc...summers off, can progress into higher paying admin jobs blah blah blah...

[Burkmere]

Originally Posted by phetaroi

Raising teacher pay attracts better more and better candidates. THat's why back in the D.C. area there is a constant battle between Fairfax and Montgomery Counties with pay and benefits the key tools of battle. It's not whole ball game, but ti's a factor.

I will agree it could be a small factor. Districts should be free to raise starting and current salaries as much as they want. Hey, if pay was a lot better I would have done it and taken some other candidate's job as I did do subbing and had similar experience and was very good at it.

However, if one raised teachers' salaries to a great degree, most wouldn't have jobs because people that elected med school, engineering, etc. would have gone the easier route and also would have been more competitive than the teachers that were employed and then those would be teachers would be complaining because they wouldn't have jobs.

Many private schools pay teachers much less than the public schools and the student's perform better. True, the students are often higher achievers in the first place, but it's also at least partial proof that paying teachers more doesn't quite to significantly higher pupil performance. Yes, I've heard the arguments of why before.

[john3232]

Paying a teacher 85 grand a year means you'll have a much lower turnover but that's pretty much it. The salary will help make dealing with disruptive classes/administrators more tolerable.

Now as far as turnovers... 4 out of 5 teachers quit after the first five years. O.k. but how many like my sister return to teaching after working in a bank or an insurance company?

Teachers like to complain about crummy students/administrators. However, once you learn how to deal with them teaching isn't that bad of a gig. (My mother, sister and I have all worked as teachers)

The vacation time? Can't beat it and the jobs major selling point.

[john3232]

Originally Posted by phetaroi

With mainstreaming, virtually all teachers have students with behavioral or "learning problem" students. They're no longer hidden in out-of-the way rooms. And yes, principals should be putting pressure on teachers to help all children.

Yes but the administration often knows full well there isn't much a teacher can accomplish if half the time is spent maintaining order.

But the admin wants to keep their job so they pass along the directives and the teachers (who also wants to keep their job) finds ways to make do.

[Burkmere]

Originally Posted by john3232

Paying a teacher 85 grand a year means you'll have a much lower turnover but that's pretty much it. The salary will help make dealing with disruptive classes/administrators more tolerable.

Now as far as turnovers... 4 out of 5 teachers quit after the first five years. O.k. but how many like my sister return to teaching after working in a bank or an insurance company?

Teachers like to complain about crummy students/administrators. However, once you learn how to deal with them teaching isn't that bad of a gig. (My mother, sister and I have all worked as teachers)

The vacation time? Can't beat it and the jobs major selling point.

Indeed. One of the best gigs out there given a halfway decent situation.

[Potential_Landlord]

Originally Posted by Burkmere

There's no proof that higher teacher pay significantly improves students' performance. Calfornia is an excellent example,. I don't have any answer as to what will other than it really has to start at home.

Don't get me started on the teacher salary thing, although maybe Arizona could use a boost. I was in California where teachers "working" 180 days a year can top out at well over 100k and retire and live high on the hog at 55 in "many" instances.

And teaching is very important, but it's also fairly easy to get a teaching certificate and teach, etc. Now I"ll be blasted, but it is no way as difficult as Med School, engineering, and many other disciplines...etc....and you can't convince me otherwise...hard to get fired, etc...summers off, can progress into higher paying admin jobs blah blah blah...

I can concur that my teaching relatives at California high schools can retire at near full benefits at 55. That's what they plan on doing... unless the retirement system blows up by that time. It seems a regular situation currently, not an exceptional circumstance to retire at 55 for California teachers (and many public employees in general).

[Burkmere]

Originally Posted by Potential_Landlord

I can concur that my teaching relatives at California high schools can retire at near full benefits at 55. That's what they plan on doing... unless the retirement system blows up by that time. It seems a regular situation currently, not an exceptional circumstance to retire at 55 for California teachers (and many public employees in general).

Correct, especially for teachers (who often being teaching at 23 or thereabouts. So 30 plus years...although for other public sector employees starting at 23 or thereabouts is much rarer.

[Hal Roach]

Originally Posted by phetaroi

Education needs subs, but if I want an analysis of education, it's not a sub I'm going to turn to.

Which reminds me of another problem: dismissing the opinions of those who are not hard core insiders, who often have far superior education, technology, and business backgrounds than the Fred Flintstone look-a-likes. All I had to do was borrow 20,000 USD to take 11 courses online at University of Phoenix, which has no admission requirements (except a pulse). Having never been uncomfortable on the right side of a decimal point; I gave it a miss. Retired at 50, but thanks for letting me use the basketball courts.