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.
That salary is unbelievably low for someone who has been credentialed for twenty years, as she claims. Twenty years of service normally places a teacher near the top of the salary schedule.
Assuming full time 40hr week, that salary comes out to a little more than $17/hr. My engineering interns make $20/hr.
Quit teaching and go do something else that pays more.
No decent teacher works 40hrs a week. Grading, parent calls, etc easily eat up additional hours. Most people know this. They just choose to act clueless. Separate topic in itself.
I don't feel sorry for teachers. Most public school salaries are available to the public. They know what kind of money they'll make before they even start undergrad. It's a choice. Choosing to teach for the pay is the stupidest decision anyone can make.
People know teaching salaries before they take the job. They have the option to pursue a different field if they want a different salary.
So you don’t think our society would be better served by offering a comfortable/living wage, so those who truly WANT to teach can do so, without being deterred by the low pay? How does it benefit us to limit this career path to people with financial flexibility, like married or independently wealthy individuals? We’re not talking about slinging burgers or filing papers, we’re talking about the educations and futures of our citizens... and the less appealing we make this career, the fewer qualified people we’ll have pursuing it. Saying “if they don’t like it they can do something else” is lazy, as you’re not even considering the impact of this problem.
I’m not talking about paying teachers enough to buy mansions and fancy cars, but they should at least earn enough to repay student loans (in a reasonable amount of time) and focus on doing their jobs, without having to also work second/third jobs to make ends meet. Maybe in some areas you can do that with $35K, but those regions are becoming hard to find and over-populated. Should the children in California, for example, suffer because no teachers can afford to live there?
I could totally wrong about this, but maybe...just maybe, her low pay has to do with the property tax collected. I know that Arizona has relatively low property taxes. And from my understanding, some/most of the property tax money goes towards schools. If that is the case, then maybe that explains her low wages? Someone else, feel free to chime in.
Barriers to entry, deferred compensation in the form of pension, hours aren’t the same as other professions, difficulty of material isnt as hard as other professions.
What does her choosing a school that cost $80,000 have to do with her pay?
What kind of certificate? Is it even valued in the market?
Why is she significantly under the average pay in her state with 20 years experience? Is she in any way responsible for that?
Can she walk out the door and get more elsewhere? If not, how is she underpaid?
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.
