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.
Just wondering if the job market for teaching in Savannah has improved any recently? We've been looking into moving to Savannah for a couple of years now but haven't had any luck. My husband has 20 years experience and has his masters in administration and bachelors in history. I have 11 years experience with a masters in reading and bachelors in elementary ed. A couple of years ago I read somewhere that Savannah schools seem to hire first year teachers rather than experienced teachers because they can pay them less. Does anyone seem to know the current situation? Are we wasting our time to keep pursuing employment in education there? We would love to move to Savannah but obviously need jobs in order for that to happen. Thanks so much for any info.
In my short and un-lamented career in teaching, I found your assumption to be correct to a degree--local school systems do tend to gravitate toward newly-minted teachers rather than experienced, multi-degreed ones. But there is another reason beyond simply having to pay them more. The administrators also want to dump lots of "extra duties" on the newbies, since they would likely be so eager to get the job that they will agree to anything. Veteran teachers, on the other hand, would have the experience to know not to get bogged down in all that stuff, since it destroys your work/life balance. These extras are traditionally dumped on the newbies because the veteran teachers don't want to do it and have the "pull" to get out of most of it.
I entered the job search having already earned an M. Ed. and interviewed in probably eight or nine systems state-wide, and found that I wasn't just being hired to teach--I was expected to coach several sports, advise student organizations, and be "on duty" for lunchtime and bus loading/unloading (behavior monitoring). It would not be "traded off" or shared--I was going to be it for the whole year in most cases. I cannot stand the feeling of being taken advantage of, especially when you don't have the power to fix the situation. After one year I moved to a different school, but found the unhappiness was not a product of that school--it was the same type of thing at the other school. I ended up leaving the education field entirely and didn't look back. If I had known how to assert myself and say "no" to all that extra stuff it might have been a better experience, but I don't think I would have stuck with it long-term. The other things just hastened my decision. There are just so many non-teaching things the local systems have to administer, with no one to actually administer them. When principals have a dozen people interviewing for one job, that whole "deer in headlights" thing might give the new guy/gal an edge. Rather than asking themselves "Is he the best history teacher?" they're asking "I wonder if I can dump the yearbook on him?"
In my short and un-lamented career in teaching, I found your assumption to be correct to a degree--local school systems do tend to gravitate toward newly-minted teachers rather than experienced, multi-degreed ones. But there is another reason beyond simply having to pay them more. The administrators also want to dump lots of "extra duties" on the newbies, since they would likely be so eager to get the job that they will agree to anything. Veteran teachers, on the other hand, would have the experience to know not to get bogged down in all that stuff, since it destroys your work/life balance. These extras are traditionally dumped on the newbies because the veteran teachers don't want to do it and have the "pull" to get out of most of it.
I entered the job search having already earned an M. Ed. and interviewed in probably eight or nine systems state-wide, and found that I wasn't just being hired to teach--I was expected to coach several sports, advise student organizations, and be "on duty" for lunchtime and bus loading/unloading (behavior monitoring). It would not be "traded off" or shared--I was going to be it for the whole year in most cases. I cannot stand the feeling of being taken advantage of, especially when you don't have the power to fix the situation. After one year I moved to a different school, but found the unhappiness was not a product of that school--it was the same type of thing at the other school. I ended up leaving the education field entirely and didn't look back. If I had known how to assert myself and say "no" to all that extra stuff it might have been a better experience, but I don't think I would have stuck with it long-term. The other things just hastened my decision. There are just so many non-teaching things the local systems have to administer, with no one to actually administer them. When principals have a dozen people interviewing for one job, that whole "deer in headlights" thing might give the new guy/gal an edge. Rather than asking themselves "Is he the best history teacher?" they're asking "I wonder if I can dump the yearbook on him?"
You are 100% accurate. My Savannah relatives (retired from teaching or educ. administration) would second that analysis. Unfortunately, a field like education -- where teachers' salaries get to be decent only with a master's degree and/or several years in the system -- is all about saving money for the school system, hiring the least experienced teachers because they are cheaper and more pliable, and then blaming these same folks for low student test scores. And to be fair, school boards do have to pay for things they didn't have to think about in the past: computers, media centers, and special-education needs. It is more expensive for them all around. Most European and Asian systems, which fund their schools at the national level, don't operate under all this local stress. And while some of them don't do any better than the US system in academic outcomes (if one believes the latest international PISA exam scores), many do better or far better than we do. The Savannah system has all these stresses and more: a majority-minority school population, lots of poor students (black and white), and a number of private schools for a city its size (which still enroll most of Savannah's middle-class and upper-class white students).
Back to the OP, though: the Savannah-Chatham school system has made fine gains recently and has some good public schools, but many mediocre ones with low standards. The Honor Rolls published in the local paper show three times as many HR students for each grade than we had back in the 1960s. (I remember only 11 -- eleven -- students on the junior-class Honor Roll in my high school, but there were many times that in a recently published Honor Roll.) Standards are not great, and neither are conditions for new teachers in Savannah-Chatham. You might move to Savannah to be a doctor, a nurse, or an EMS tech, but there are much better cities than Savannah if you want to be a schoolteacher.
I would also add that I'm quite impressed by both your resumes. Some local principals might have reason to be nervous, though, since you probably are more qualified for the job they currently hold than they are. There is a certain amount of "failing upward" in government positions. If someone isn't quite cutting it as a teacher, they might be encouraged to try administration!!
Question: Are there any web sites/groups that cater to this subject? ie: teachers rating cities, employment ops, etc.
Reason I ask is ...how many highly qualified replies can you get from this forum board? I don't know, BTW.
Yes, I have looked at several different sites as far as teaching in Georgia and all goes but I was just hoping to get more of an "insider" or even someone's personal experience on teaching in Savannah and maybe even how the process actually works. Without knowing anyone who is actually employed by or at least somewhat familiar with Savannah schools, it's hard to really get how it REALLY works. For instance, how our school system shows they hire and how they actually hire are 2 different things. Here, and I'm sure many places, it's all about knowing someone. However, things are changing here in Oklahoma, what once was a state that had many more applicants than teaching positions, now are hiring whoever they can find to fill positions due to many OK teachers leaving because of pay and more demands. (OK is now 50th on the pay scale). We have both applied for several jobs on the Savannah school website but have heard nothing….. Ideally, someone who teaches in Savannah will see my post and respond.
I would also add that I'm quite impressed by both your resumes. Some local principals might have reason to be nervous, though, since you probably are more qualified for the job they currently hold than they are. There is a certain amount of "failing upward" in government positions. If someone isn't quite cutting it as a teacher, they might be encouraged to try administration!!
Thank you! That's very interesting…. and scary to say the least...
In my short and un-lamented career in teaching, I found your assumption to be correct to a degree--local school systems do tend to gravitate toward newly-minted teachers rather than experienced, multi-degreed ones. But there is another reason beyond simply having to pay them more. The administrators also want to dump lots of "extra duties" on the newbies, since they would likely be so eager to get the job that they will agree to anything. Veteran teachers, on the other hand, would have the experience to know not to get bogged down in all that stuff, since it destroys your work/life balance. These extras are traditionally dumped on the newbies because the veteran teachers don't want to do it and have the "pull" to get out of most of it.
I entered the job search having already earned an M. Ed. and interviewed in probably eight or nine systems state-wide, and found that I wasn't just being hired to teach--I was expected to coach several sports, advise student organizations, and be "on duty" for lunchtime and bus loading/unloading (behavior monitoring). It would not be "traded off" or shared--I was going to be it for the whole year in most cases. I cannot stand the feeling of being taken advantage of, especially when you don't have the power to fix the situation. After one year I moved to a different school, but found the unhappiness was not a product of that school--it was the same type of thing at the other school. I ended up leaving the education field entirely and didn't look back. If I had known how to assert myself and say "no" to all that extra stuff it might have been a better experience, but I don't think I would have stuck with it long-term. The other things just hastened my decision. There are just so many non-teaching things the local systems have to administer, with no one to actually administer them. When principals have a dozen people interviewing for one job, that whole "deer in headlights" thing might give the new guy/gal an edge. Rather than asking themselves "Is he the best history teacher?" they're asking "I wonder if I can dump the yearbook on him?"
Well, considering I have two daughters in college with one of them starting med school in August and a third daughter entering high school next year, I can't afford to change my career and go back to school myself….. not that I would even know where to even begin as far as finding something new anyway. I actually do love teaching and can't really see myself doing anything else and guess I've just kinda learned to accept my extra duties as "part of my job" lol.
One of my HS teachers (back when Effingham had only one HS) quite candidly told me that if I could picture myself doing anything other than teaching, then I probably would not be able to last those first five years. Once again, she was right on.
It could of course be a very different thing for experienced teachers. In my situation, I was a total neophyte, having to learn how to do my "real" job in a real setting. The situations they'd placed us in during the Teacher Ed program for training and experience were more fairly tale than non-fiction, so I was literally a few hours ahead of my students in a lot of cases, dreaming up lesson plans on the fly and trying to keep papers graded, etc. So being asked to take on the extra duties was a genuine hardship, and contributed a great deal to my inability to gain "traction". Teachers such as yourselves who probably already have a file of tried-and-true lesson plans from previous years don't have that kind of pressure, and I envied my colleagues for having that advantage.
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.
Some local principals might have reason to be nervous, though, since you probably are more qualified for the job they currently hold than they are. There is a certain amount of "failing upward" in government positions. If someone isn't quite cutting it as a teacher, they might be encouraged to try administration!!
