What's wrong with teachers?

[Tubman]

Some teachers get their money from taxpayers.

I'm sorry, bud, but there are federal documents proving that the money the government uses to pay teachers' wages comes primarily from property taxes.

You're forgetting teachers that aren't paid by the government at all.

Doug "who was simply making a subtle complaint that the article did not distinguish between private schools and public schools"

Entschultigen Sie mir, bitte...I forgot about private schools...my apologies...

[Doug@GT]

Entschultigen Sie mir, bitte...I forgot about private schools...my apologies...

s'ok...that's what I get for being ambiguous...

[rocksanddirt]

Ray gets at the real issue for most public school teachers that I know. The lack of authority regarding every aspect of the educational system is why they are stressed out and feel 'underpaid'. There is plenty of research that shows that control of the working environment leads to less employee stress.

My wife teaches at a private school (where our kids go), that has no principal or headmaster. The activities of a principal are handled by a) the entire faculty working together (hiring, curriculum, etc), b) an adminstrative person, who helps the faculty implement thier programs, c) a business manager. So, while they are paid about 20 to 40 % less than the local public schools, with crappier benefits....they typically love it. Mostly because the teachers themselves are in charge (imo).

[MartyNeilan]

Joe, this is by where I live, and it is a very respectable district (Mt. Juliet and Lebanon TN - great places to live and raise a family.) Starting pay is - $32,000. It would take 20 years to get to $45,000; "only" 16 years with a Master's degree. Don't tell me that a degreed professional with 20 years of experience should be making $45k.

Full chart at:
http://www.wcschools.com/Employment/doc ... d-0708.pdf

[TMurphy]

Marty, that pay scale, in a word, sucks. In my district, starting salary this year is $44,500. Not a bad salary for a college grad with a bachelor's degree at all, in my opinion. Of course, I would assume that it is a bit more expensive to live in northern NJ than in most areas of TN, mostly due to the proximity of Manhattan and the high value of real state (even in the crashing market). I live in a 2 bedroom apartment with backyard access and laundry facilities, and pay $1200 a month in rent (utilities included). This, by virtually all accounts, is an absolute bargain for this apartment.

The real interesting thing about the pay scale in my district is what happens when advanced degrees get involved. Most districts work like the one Marty posted...seperate pay scale for Master's degree, only slightly higher. In my town, a Master's degree is worth nearly $6000 on top of your annual salary. If your Master's degree is "in field," add ANOTHER $6000. That means, were I to get a Master's degree in music, I would be earning almost $12,000 a year MORE than I am now. The only catch is, we are one of the few districts around that offer no tuition assistance. But at that rate, the cost of a Master's degree would be earned back in 2-3 years.

No, I wouldn't say teachers are underpaid. The biggest problem confronting the profession, in my opinion, is lack of accountability. Many teachers, after reaching that magical 3 years + 1 day mark (when they get tenure), phone it in for the rest of their career, and skate by, while still making the same money as someone with similar experience who busts their *** doing a great job. That is the real problem, in my opinion.

[steve_decker]

$40K may be good, but if you consider:

After taxes, teacher retirement, social security (yes, they take that out too), medical/dental/vision, and insurance, the net is roughly 3/5 of the gross.

Ken F.

How is that different than most any other job/profession in our country? For as long as I can remember, my net has been about 60% of my gross. I don't think I'm underpaid but I would love to be able to retain more of my gross income.

As far as being somewhat difficult to maintain a household on $40k/yr, that again is not specific or unique to teaching. It is one of many reasons why our country's personal debt has continued to grow while more and more families are forced into dual-income situations.

[steve_decker]

The biggest problem confronting the profession, in my opinion, is lack of accountability. Many teachers, after reaching that magical 3 years + 1 day mark (when they get tenure), phone it in for the rest of their career, and skate by, while still making the same money as someone with similar experience who busts their *** doing a great job. That is the real problem, in my opinion.

That idealogy likely makes you a very good teacher.

I remember, about 15 years ago, many teachers working out of tenure in exchange for higher pay because they wanted the accountability and actually wanted to have annual performance reviews. It was a trend that I hoped would've become much more widespread.

[steve_decker]

The article's value comes from it being thought-provoking not, in my opinion, accurate or reasonable. Specific to the issue at hand, I truly have a hard time being sympathetic with teachers (or anyone that gripes about their chosen profession). At this point, the debate about teacher's wages has been so prevalant that I cannot imagine anyone being unaware of it prior to choosing teaching as a career. To me, that negates the entire argument that teachers are not paid enough. If they knew their potential earnings when they were considering the career and chose it anyway then they obviously entered the field for reasons other than future financial gain. In most cases teachers earn what many of us would consider to be a reasonable wage while reaping what many of us would consider to be exceptional perks/benefits.

As a recently retired member of the teaching profession, I'd like to briefly jump into this debate. I got completely tired of the point about more money. For me, the main issue was working conditions. Teachers are given much to do, with little authority to do it. If I had been able to buy sufficient authority for $500 of my own money, per month, I would have been happy to do so. I could have then done my job infinitely better. Instead, I had to deal with an untold number of obstacles. Each year, the first faculty meeting of the year would outline what the new ones were. I could go on and on about this. Fortunately for me, I no longer have that set of problems. America should be happy we are still able to get anyone to be a teacher. In my opinion, it has always been a calling. I have to believe that is the only reason someone with skills would join the ranks, these days.

Amen!

Our educational system would be much improved if all teachers and educators truly viewed it as a calling.

[TubaRay]

As for why my mom toiled away for 27 years, to be more accurate (19 when I was alive...thus the observed over the past 19 years),

OK. I missed this in my first reading of your post. So, Tubaman, now that you are not alive, do you have a different perspective of the teaching profession than you did when you were?

[TMurphy]

I remember, about 15 years ago, many teachers working out of tenure in exchange for higher pay because they wanted the accountability and actually wanted to have annual performance reviews. It was a trend that I hoped would've become much more widespread.

If I was a classroom teacher, teaching an academic subject like math or english, I would take that offer in a heartbeat. As a music teacher, however, I'm not entirely sure I want that. Don't get me wrong, I put everything I can into doing my job to the best of my ability, but many people view arts classes (and teachers, by extension) as "expendable"....being untenured and costing the district more money would not end well for me, I don't think. If I could have some kind of guarantee my program wouldn't be cut, though, I'd opt for that.

[Tubman]

As for why my mom toiled away for 27 years, to be more accurate (19 when I was alive...thus the observed over the past 19 years),

OK. I missed this in my first reading of your post. So, Tubaman, now that you are not alive, do you have a different perspective of the teaching profession than you did when you were?

Haha! NO! I didn't mean it like that! :lol:I meant as long as I've been alive...

[TubaRay]

I have noticed the repeated use of the word "tenure," in relation to public school teaching. I taught most of my career in Texas, when the tenure is never officially used, nor is the concept of tenure, as I know it. In Texas, one receives a "probationary" contract in their first year working for a district. If all goes well, one can be offered a "continuing" contract after that. As I understand it, the continuing contract is not an automatic after that first year.

The difference between the two is not dramatic. At least, it isn't in actual practice. A probationary contract makes it possible for a school district to not renew a contract without giving a particular reason. The continuing contract provides some, and please notice my emphasis on that word, protection to the teacher. In theory, this prevents a district from simply deciding they want to hire someone else.

In the academic world(from my perception, anyway), it is not always simple for a district to rid themselves of a particular teacher. With athletics and band, however, this is just not the case. Most school principals consider the A.D. and the band director to be key positions. There is much more public scrutiny than there is for the academic teachers. When the coach or band director do a poor job, it is usually noticed. With the other teachers, they have much less information to base their opinions on.

[ken k]

SICK OF THOSE HIGH PAID TEACHERS!!

I, for one, am sick and tired of those high paid teachers.
Their hefty salaries are driving up taxes, and they only work nine or ten months a year!

It's time we put things in perspective and pay them for what they do....baby-sit! We can get that for less than minimum wage.

That's right... I would give them $3.00 dollars an hour and only for the hours they worked, not any of that silly planning time.

That would be $15 dollars a day.

Each parent should pay $15 dollars a day for these teachers to baby-sit their children. Now, how many do they teach in a day....maybe 25.

Then that's 15 x 25= $375 a day

But remember they only work 180 days a year!
I'm not going to pay them for any vacations. Let's see....

That's 375 x 180 = $67,500
(Hold on, my calculator must need batteries!)

What about those special teachers or the ones with master's degrees?

Well, we could pay them minimum wage just to be fair.
Let's round it off to $6.00 an hour.

That would be:
$6 x 5 hours x 25 children x 180 days= $135,000 per year.

Wait a minute, there is something wrong here!!!!
There sure is, duh????!!!!

I know it doesn't really mean anything, I just thought I would throw that in for a little levity.

[TubaRay]

SICK OF THOSE HIGH PAID TEACHERS!!

I know it doesn't really mean anything, I just thought I would throw that in for a little levity.

There's more than just a little levity there. And the concept of babysitting isn't far off, either! Thanks for throwing this into the mix. I had seen it before, but I still appreciated it, and laughed again, as well.

[rocksanddirt]

Here's how my wife explained 'tenure'.

snip

Ken F.

Here in California it is different, and each school district is different also. Generally, There is a 'tenure' set up within each district, so that after a certain amount of probationary time (usually three years), one pretty much has to sexually assault a school board member to get fired. Prior to that magic time accrued, one can be let go for no reason. However, just because a district has to keep you, doesn't mean you stay with the same school and or class set up. Most districts in CA also cover both high and low income areas and have schools in each...so, if you end up at your districts rich kid schools, with parents involved in their kids education....it can be a great calling to work with wonderful kids in a supportive environment (with a minimum of institutional stupidity). screw up/slack off to much/be a jerk and you might be tranfered to 'the murder capitol of the USA', issued a flack-jacket and told...good luck.

[TubaRay]

My advice to new graduates interviewing for jobs: put the district under the same microscope they put you under. Do the research. Find out how many teachers have been there longer than 10 years...15...20...and so on. Talk to the teachers. Find out how they feel about their job/school/district.

A real good post, Ken. It is worth noting that school districts here have resorted to another(IMHO) sneaky practice. They have raised the pay in the lower levels of experience at a much greater rate than they have for experienced teachers. This tends to work well at attracting young teachers, since the pay isn't bad. The problem is that you make much less progress through the years than was once true. I would think this will backfire in the area of keeping experienced teachers, as they see they won't have much in the financial future. Couple this with the things they are asked to contend with, and it is not likely a large percentage of them will continue in the profession.

As I entered the profession, I was told that most teachers, music included, take three years to learn how to teach. I would like to see the stats on the number of teachers who last past three years, these days. I guess this fits in with many school districts priorities. The important thing is not the kids(despite the ever popular phrase that pays), but is how to keep the budget low for teacher salaries.

And, for those that will accuse me of being very cynical, I am very cynical. I spent about half my life working inside the system. These days I am actually teaching. It is absolutely wonderful. I truly enjoy teaching. My time as a full-time public school teacher was not so wonderful. It had some wonderful moments. Virtually all of them were because of the kids.

[The Big Ben]

My advice to new graduates interviewing for jobs: put the district under the same microscope they put you under. Do the research. Find out how many teachers have been there longer than 10 years...15...20...and so on. Talk to the teachers. Find out how they feel about their job/school/district.

A real good post, Ken. It is worth noting that school districts here have resorted to another(IMHO) sneaky practice. They have raised the pay in the lower levels of experience at a much greater rate than they have for experienced teachers. This tends to work well at attracting young teachers, since the pay isn't bad. The problem is that you make much less progress through the years than was once true. I would think this will backfire in the area of keeping experienced teachers, as they see they won't have much in the financial future. Couple this with the things they are asked to contend with, and it is not likely a large percentage of them will continue in the profession.

As I entered the profession, I was told that most teachers, music included, take three years to learn how to teach. I would like to see the stats on the number of teachers who last past three years, these days. I guess this fits in with many school districts priorities. The important thing is not the kids(despite the ever popular phrase that pays), but is how to keep the budget low for teacher salaries.

I have learned that, when a new administrator comes in and says, "Remember, we're here for the kids", we're in for trouble. Some of the most self-serving, incompetent administrators have used that as a rationale for every stupid, self serving thing that they do.

I substitute taught for seven years trying to get into the teaching profession. That's where I really learned to teach. That was a two edged sword for me because the places I worked wouldn't hire me full time because I was a good substitute teacher. I solved a problem for them.

I was told by one of my teaching mentors at "until you have taught for ten years, you don't know **** about teaching". He was right. After 28 years, I still learn things about teaching each and every day. That's one of the things I like about it.

And, for those that will accuse me of being very cynical, I am very cynical. I spent about half my life working inside the system. These days I am actually teaching. It is absolutely wonderful. I truly enjoy teaching. My time as a full-time public school teacher was not so wonderful. It had some wonderful moments. Virtually all of them were because of the kids.

My best moments have been with the kids, too. I'm 52 and I can retire after 30 years but can't draw the pension until 65 without a serious (like 50% reduction) cut for drawing it early. I hope I last because the kids are a gas. The people I have to work with, well.....

[tubaguy9]

Well, I guess at least in my view of things, like all other professions, there are good and bad. I think I might put an example of both in here...

First, the good. They truly are over-worked and under-paid. Example, one of my former band directors in High School. I couldn't tell you how many hours he put into the job. Period. He'd get there at around 6:00 A.M., so the early rehearsal could start at 7:00, and real school started at 8:00. Then, he'd be working on something for the band the whole time he was there. And often stayed past 5:00, and it wasn't uncommon for him to stay until likely 8:00. And even later if there was a band event that day. If we had a 7:00-9:00 P.M. rehearsal, he probably stayed until 11:00 P.M. And I know he was there for every meeting for the band and helped as much as possible. I likely have him to thank for some of my love of music.

However, on the complete opposite end. I had a VERY lazy Social Studies teacher my freshman year. We literally only learned by video. Maybe a lecture only once in a while. Which was maybe once a month, at most. The other time he sat at his desk. There were a few classes that he filled his time playing chess with a kid. He got to the school maybe at 7:45 A.M., and left at 3:20 if he didn't have a football game to coach. And maybe stayed at the school until 5:00 P.M. ONLY because of football coaching.

And to explain that I don't think that it's just teachers, my good band teacher was forced to leave after my Sophmore year. The bad one is still there.

And what were they paid? Probably around $40,000 a year. Because of stipends due to the extra-curricular activities. That ticks me off.

[TMurphy]

I was told by one of my teaching mentors at "until you have taught for ten years, you don't know **** about teaching". He was right. After 28 years, I still learn things about teaching each and every day. That's one of the things I like about it.

Having been teaching for all of 1 year, I think you're probably right about that one. I'm learning more and more every single day, and I still feel like I have no clue what I'm doing most of the time. The flip side of that is seeing a student's face light up when they figure out what I was talking about. That is a really, really cool feeling.

As for tenure, here in NJ, it works like pretty much how Ken described. Every year, you are offered a contract. After three years and 1 day, you get tenured, which means the district cannot terminate a teacher without cause. There is a hearing involved. It is difficult to do, and so for the most part, unless a teacher does something highly unethical or negligent, they're keeping their job.

Of course, if a bad teacher is tenured and the district wants to get rid of them, they'll find ways to make that person quit, but that doesn't always work.

[Matt G]

You know what? I came into this with a pretty strong opinion, backed it up by research and personal/experience (aka listening to my mother talk to her teaching buddies whenever I would go over to her school after the work day) and it seems there are as many variations on the same information as there are opinions on this subject. So, I think I'll just leave it at that and take a break...

Important lesson to be learned here:

The plural form of anecdote is not data.