Unpopular opinion: DCPS teachers are super well paid!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s also the question of what the public gets in exchange for these fat salaries, benefits, etc. The majority of public schools in DC are really terrible.

Are teachers truly to blame for all the problems of the school system?

Do we blame doctors when patients are diagnosed with cancer? Do we blame accountants for our bad financial decisions?

Yet we blame teachers when a neglected child cannot read on grade level.

Huh.

Ok well if teachers make no difference then you should be paid accordingly.

Makes no sense. Teachers are doing their jobs. The system makes it so that their jobs are incredibly difficult. If the system wants better results, they can do things differently. But to slam teachers is crazy—and it’s a lazy way of thinking. It’s incredibly difficult to treat certain cancers, but doctors who have a very low survival rate in their patients still get paid well. No one would suggest they get paid according to who lives. If a bus driver is stuck in a traffic jam, would you dock their pay for not making their route on time? Pick any job/profession. Only teachers get talked about this way. It’s so disrespectful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s also the question of what the public gets in exchange for these fat salaries, benefits, etc. The majority of public schools in DC are really terrible.

Are teachers truly to blame for all the problems of the school system?

Do we blame doctors when patients are diagnosed with cancer? Do we blame accountants for our bad financial decisions?

Yet we blame teachers when a neglected child cannot read on grade level.

Huh.

Ok well if teachers make no difference then you should be paid accordingly.

Makes no sense. Teachers are doing their jobs. The system makes it so that their jobs are incredibly difficult. If the system wants better results, they can do things differently. But to slam teachers is crazy—and it’s a lazy way of thinking. It’s incredibly difficult to treat certain cancers, but doctors who have a very low survival rate in their patients still get paid well. No one would suggest they get paid according to who lives. If a bus driver is stuck in a traffic jam, would you dock their pay for not making their route on time? Pick any job/profession. Only teachers get talked about this way. It’s so disrespectful.

Exactly. I suspect this lazy thinking is rooted in the idea that people *think* they know what teaching is like. After all, these posters sat in a classroom once. Many years ago.

Teachers know the truth, and they are performing miracles with limited resources daily.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s also the question of what the public gets in exchange for these fat salaries, benefits, etc. The majority of public schools in DC are really terrible.

Are teachers truly to blame for all the problems of the school system?

Do we blame doctors when patients are diagnosed with cancer? Do we blame accountants for our bad financial decisions?

Yet we blame teachers when a neglected child cannot read on grade level.

Huh.

Ok well if teachers make no difference then you should be paid accordingly.

Makes no sense. Teachers are doing their jobs. The system makes it so that their jobs are incredibly difficult. If the system wants better results, they can do things differently. But to slam teachers is crazy—and it’s a lazy way of thinking. It’s incredibly difficult to treat certain cancers, but doctors who have a very low survival rate in their patients still get paid well. No one would suggest they get paid according to who lives. If a bus driver is stuck in a traffic jam, would you dock their pay for not making their route on time? Pick any job/profession. Only teachers get talked about this way. It’s so disrespectful.

Exactly. I suspect this lazy thinking is rooted in the idea that people *think* they know what teaching is like. After all, these posters sat in a classroom once. Many years ago.

Teachers know the truth, and they are performing miracles with limited resources daily.

Yes. I mean this PP even admitted it when they said:

"
How much do you think that other nonprofit professionals with 20 years of experience and a master's make, and who have similar benefits (except for the summar breaks, week at Christmas and Easter)? Who also have huge drawbacks in their work (which are hard to describe, relatively, because most of us can imagine what it's like to be in a classroom)?"
I remember before I began my career as a teacher that I imagined it was like how I perceived school when I was a kid. It's about as relevant as pretending you know what it's like to be a pilot bc you've been on an airplane or that you know what it's like to be a doctor bc you saw pediatrician as a child

[Anonymous]

As someone said above, if teaching is such a good gig for the money, why is there such a shortage of teachers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s also the question of what the public gets in exchange for these fat salaries, benefits, etc. The majority of public schools in DC are really terrible.

Are teachers truly to blame for all the problems of the school system?

Do we blame doctors when patients are diagnosed with cancer? Do we blame accountants for our bad financial decisions?

Yet we blame teachers when a neglected child cannot read on grade level.

Huh.

Ok well if teachers make no difference then you should be paid accordingly.

Makes no sense. Teachers are doing their jobs. The system makes it so that their jobs are incredibly difficult. If the system wants better results, they can do things differently. But to slam teachers is crazy—and it’s a lazy way of thinking. It’s incredibly difficult to treat certain cancers, but doctors who have a very low survival rate in their patients still get paid well. No one would suggest they get paid according to who lives. If a bus driver is stuck in a traffic jam, would you dock their pay for not making their route on time? Pick any job/profession. Only teachers get talked about this way. It’s so disrespectful.

Exactly. I suspect this lazy thinking is rooted in the idea that people *think* they know what teaching is like. After all, these posters sat in a classroom once. Many years ago.

Teachers know the truth, and they are performing miracles with limited resources daily.

Yes. I mean this PP even admitted it when they said:

"
How much do you think that other nonprofit professionals with 20 years of experience and a master's make, and who have similar benefits (except for the summar breaks, week at Christmas and Easter)? Who also have huge drawbacks in their work (which are hard to describe, relatively, because most of us can imagine what it's like to be in a classroom)?"
I remember before I began my career as a teacher that I imagined it was like how I perceived school when I was a kid. It's about as relevant as pretending you know what it's like to be a pilot bc you've been on an airplane or that you know what it's like to be a doctor bc you saw pediatrician as a child

People do this kind of thing with teachers ALL. THE. TIME. Dunning-Kruger all the way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s also the question of what the public gets in exchange for these fat salaries, benefits, etc. The majority of public schools in DC are really terrible.

Are teachers truly to blame for all the problems of the school system?

Do we blame doctors when patients are diagnosed with cancer? Do we blame accountants for our bad financial decisions?

Yet we blame teachers when a neglected child cannot read on grade level.

Huh.

Ok well if teachers make no difference then you should be paid accordingly.

Makes no sense. Teachers are doing their jobs. The system makes it so that their jobs are incredibly difficult. If the system wants better results, they can do things differently. But to slam teachers is crazy—and it’s a lazy way of thinking. It’s incredibly difficult to treat certain cancers, but doctors who have a very low survival rate in their patients still get paid well. No one would suggest they get paid according to who lives. If a bus driver is stuck in a traffic jam, would you dock their pay for not making their route on time? Pick any job/profession. Only teachers get talked about this way. It’s so disrespectful.

Makes no sense at all. What I also don't understand is that people take such a simplistic view when judging teachers and schools. Low levels of proficiency do not mean there is no growth. Proficiency on PARCC is a 4. If a kids comes into high school at a 1 and grows to a 2, those teachers helped that kid with about two years of growth. I assure you that this was not easy and took real expertise. There are some high schools in DC where the majority of students are arriving not on grade level. If teachers help them grow to a 2 or 3, the school will show up as having zero or few kids proficient but the growth is high and those students will have much better future opportunities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s also the question of what the public gets in exchange for these fat salaries, benefits, etc. The majority of public schools in DC are really terrible.

Are teachers truly to blame for all the problems of the school system?

Do we blame doctors when patients are diagnosed with cancer? Do we blame accountants for our bad financial decisions?

Yet we blame teachers when a neglected child cannot read on grade level.

Huh.

Ok well if teachers make no difference then you should be paid accordingly.

Makes no sense. Teachers are doing their jobs. The system makes it so that their jobs are incredibly difficult. If the system wants better results, they can do things differently. But to slam teachers is crazy—and it’s a lazy way of thinking. It’s incredibly difficult to treat certain cancers, but doctors who have a very low survival rate in their patients still get paid well. No one would suggest they get paid according to who lives. If a bus driver is stuck in a traffic jam, would you dock their pay for not making their route on time? Pick any job/profession. Only teachers get talked about this way. It’s so disrespectful.

Makes no sense at all. What I also don't understand is that people take such a simplistic view when judging teachers and schools. Low levels of proficiency do not mean there is no growth. Proficiency on PARCC is a 4. If a kids comes into high school at a 1 and grows to a 2, those teachers helped that kid with about two years of growth. I assure you that this was not easy and took real expertise. There are some high schools in DC where the majority of students are arriving not on grade level. If teachers help them grow to a 2 or 3, the school will show up as having zero or few kids proficient but the growth is high and those students will have much better future opportunities.

1000% this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s also the question of what the public gets in exchange for these fat salaries, benefits, etc. The majority of public schools in DC are really terrible.

Are teachers truly to blame for all the problems of the school system?

Do we blame doctors when patients are diagnosed with cancer? Do we blame accountants for our bad financial decisions?

Yet we blame teachers when a neglected child cannot read on grade level.

Huh.

Ok well if teachers make no difference then you should be paid accordingly.

Makes no sense. Teachers are doing their jobs. The system makes it so that their jobs are incredibly difficult. If the system wants better results, they can do things differently. But to slam teachers is crazy—and it’s a lazy way of thinking. It’s incredibly difficult to treat certain cancers, but doctors who have a very low survival rate in their patients still get paid well. No one would suggest they get paid according to who lives. If a bus driver is stuck in a traffic jam, would you dock their pay for not making their route on time? Pick any job/profession. Only teachers get talked about this way. It’s so disrespectful.

Makes no sense at all. What I also don't understand is that people take such a simplistic view when judging teachers and schools. Low levels of proficiency do not mean there is no growth. Proficiency on PARCC is a 4. If a kids comes into high school at a 1 and grows to a 2, those teachers helped that kid with about two years of growth. I assure you that this was not easy and took real expertise. There are some high schools in DC where the majority of students are arriving not on grade level. If teachers help them grow to a 2 or 3, the school will show up as having zero or few kids proficient but the growth is high and those students will have much better future opportunities.

Why are they arriving at grade level below their potential? If HS teachers can make extra progress, then shouldn't that have happened earlier?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s also the question of what the public gets in exchange for these fat salaries, benefits, etc. The majority of public schools in DC are really terrible.

Are teachers truly to blame for all the problems of the school system?

Do we blame doctors when patients are diagnosed with cancer? Do we blame accountants for our bad financial decisions?

Yet we blame teachers when a neglected child cannot read on grade level.

Huh.

Ok well if teachers make no difference then you should be paid accordingly.

Makes no sense. Teachers are doing their jobs. The system makes it so that their jobs are incredibly difficult. If the system wants better results, they can do things differently. But to slam teachers is crazy—and it’s a lazy way of thinking. It’s incredibly difficult to treat certain cancers, but doctors who have a very low survival rate in their patients still get paid well. No one would suggest they get paid according to who lives. If a bus driver is stuck in a traffic jam, would you dock their pay for not making their route on time? Pick any job/profession. Only teachers get talked about this way. It’s so disrespectful.

Makes no sense at all. What I also don't understand is that people take such a simplistic view when judging teachers and schools. Low levels of proficiency do not mean there is no growth. Proficiency on PARCC is a 4. If a kids comes into high school at a 1 and grows to a 2, those teachers helped that kid with about two years of growth. I assure you that this was not easy and took real expertise. There are some high schools in DC where the majority of students are arriving not on grade level. If teachers help them grow to a 2 or 3, the school will show up as having zero or few kids proficient but the growth is high and those students will have much better future opportunities.

Why are they arriving at grade level below their potential? If HS teachers can make extra progress, then shouldn't that have happened earlier?

It’s not a bad question, but the answer is far more complicated than just that teachers must be bad. Even really great teachers (and there are many) are struggling within a dysfunctional system. For example, if a kid is consistently absent, there is very little the teacher can do. They can report the absences, but they aren’t CPS. The kids in the classroom, every day, will get the teacher’s help and will obviously do better than the ones who are chronically absent. And truancy is huge in D.C. We can’t just point to teachers as to why those kids aren’t reading well. There are also SO MANY kids in the classroom who need special services who are not receiving them, and the teacher cannot be the teacher, the paraprofessional, the social worker, the reading specialist, the OT, etc., all in one. Teachers can suggest an evaluation, but beyond that, if the student isn’t receiving testing/services, it can be incredibly hard to help that student reach their potential. Many parents are frustrated with this system as well, and sometimes even homeschool because of lack of support. But kids who stay in the system, and are moved up, are often thought to have been failed by teachers. Anyone who defaults to “the teachers are obviously just bad” has no idea what is an actually happening in schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As someone said above, if teaching is such a good gig for the money, why is there such a shortage of teachers?

Because management sucks and everyone passes the buck. As the only front facing part of the system, teachers get blamed for the leadership failures of central office.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s also the question of what the public gets in exchange for these fat salaries, benefits, etc. The majority of public schools in DC are really terrible.

Are teachers truly to blame for all the problems of the school system?

Do we blame doctors when patients are diagnosed with cancer? Do we blame accountants for our bad financial decisions?

Yet we blame teachers when a neglected child cannot read on grade level.

Huh.

Ok well if teachers make no difference then you should be paid accordingly.

Makes no sense. Teachers are doing their jobs. The system makes it so that their jobs are incredibly difficult. If the system wants better results, they can do things differently. But to slam teachers is crazy—and it’s a lazy way of thinking. It’s incredibly difficult to treat certain cancers, but doctors who have a very low survival rate in their patients still get paid well. No one would suggest they get paid according to who lives. If a bus driver is stuck in a traffic jam, would you dock their pay for not making their route on time? Pick any job/profession. Only teachers get talked about this way. It’s so disrespectful.

Makes no sense at all. What I also don't understand is that people take such a simplistic view when judging teachers and schools. Low levels of proficiency do not mean there is no growth. Proficiency on PARCC is a 4. If a kids comes into high school at a 1 and grows to a 2, those teachers helped that kid with about two years of growth. I assure you that this was not easy and took real expertise. There are some high schools in DC where the majority of students are arriving not on grade level. If teachers help them grow to a 2 or 3, the school will show up as having zero or few kids proficient but the growth is high and those students will have much better future opportunities.

Why are they arriving at grade level below their potential? If HS teachers can make extra progress, then shouldn't that have happened earlier?

It’s not a bad question, but the answer is far more complicated than just that teachers must be bad. Even really great teachers (and there are many) are struggling within a dysfunctional system. For example, if a kid is consistently absent, there is very little the teacher can do. They can report the absences, but they aren’t CPS. The kids in the classroom, every day, will get the teacher’s help and will obviously do better than the ones who are chronically absent. And truancy is huge in D.C. We can’t just point to teachers as to why those kids aren’t reading well. There are also SO MANY kids in the classroom who need special services who are not receiving them, and the teacher cannot be the teacher, the paraprofessional, the social worker, the reading specialist, the OT, etc., all in one. Teachers can suggest an evaluation, but beyond that, if the student isn’t receiving testing/services, it can be incredibly hard to help that student reach their potential. Many parents are frustrated with this system as well, and sometimes even homeschool because of lack of support. But kids who stay in the system, and are moved up, are often thought to have been failed by teachers. Anyone who defaults to “the teachers are obviously just bad” has no idea what is an actually happening in schools.

I understand all these issues. But it still seems more likely that teacher could get a kid from a 2 to 3 in 5th grade, not HS. On the truancy vector alone, you would expect more opportunity for success before HS.

So if students are showing up to HS with lots of room for improvement, whatever the base, it seems that more than the students own disadvantages were holding them back before

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s also the question of what the public gets in exchange for these fat salaries, benefits, etc. The majority of public schools in DC are really terrible.

Are teachers truly to blame for all the problems of the school system?

Do we blame doctors when patients are diagnosed with cancer? Do we blame accountants for our bad financial decisions?

Yet we blame teachers when a neglected child cannot read on grade level.

Huh.

Ok well if teachers make no difference then you should be paid accordingly.

Makes no sense. Teachers are doing their jobs. The system makes it so that their jobs are incredibly difficult. If the system wants better results, they can do things differently. But to slam teachers is crazy—and it’s a lazy way of thinking. It’s incredibly difficult to treat certain cancers, but doctors who have a very low survival rate in their patients still get paid well. No one would suggest they get paid according to who lives. If a bus driver is stuck in a traffic jam, would you dock their pay for not making their route on time? Pick any job/profession. Only teachers get talked about this way. It’s so disrespectful.

Makes no sense at all. What I also don't understand is that people take such a simplistic view when judging teachers and schools. Low levels of proficiency do not mean there is no growth. Proficiency on PARCC is a 4. If a kids comes into high school at a 1 and grows to a 2, those teachers helped that kid with about two years of growth. I assure you that this was not easy and took real expertise. There are some high schools in DC where the majority of students are arriving not on grade level. If teachers help them grow to a 2 or 3, the school will show up as having zero or few kids proficient but the growth is high and those students will have much better future opportunities.

Why are they arriving at grade level below their potential? If HS teachers can make extra progress, then shouldn't that have happened earlier?

It’s not a bad question, but the answer is far more complicated than just that teachers must be bad. Even really great teachers (and there are many) are struggling within a dysfunctional system. For example, if a kid is consistently absent, there is very little the teacher can do. They can report the absences, but they aren’t CPS. The kids in the classroom, every day, will get the teacher’s help and will obviously do better than the ones who are chronically absent. And truancy is huge in D.C. We can’t just point to teachers as to why those kids aren’t reading well. There are also SO MANY kids in the classroom who need special services who are not receiving them, and the teacher cannot be the teacher, the paraprofessional, the social worker, the reading specialist, the OT, etc., all in one. Teachers can suggest an evaluation, but beyond that, if the student isn’t receiving testing/services, it can be incredibly hard to help that student reach their potential. Many parents are frustrated with this system as well, and sometimes even homeschool because of lack of support. But kids who stay in the system, and are moved up, are often thought to have been failed by teachers. Anyone who defaults to “the teachers are obviously just bad” has no idea what is an actually happening in schools.

I understand all these issues. But it still seems more likely that teacher could get a kid from a 2 to 3 in 5th grade, not HS. On the truancy vector alone, you would expect more opportunity for success before HS.

So if students are showing up to HS with lots of room for improvement, whatever the base, it seems that more than the students own disadvantages were holding them back before

NP and I agree that 5th grade is easier to make gains than HS. But honestly there are so many kids who come to PreK already behind. Or they are absent at least once a week. Or they aren’t read to at home or fed a healthy meal at home. Or are watched by a middle school sibling at home. Elementary school in many DCPS schools is like a race against the clock to get kids reading and doing basic math. But some of the obstacles are heart breaking and totally outside the teacher’s control

[Anonymous]

PP again and I’ll give one example from years ago. A kid who was in first grade would either show up late to school (think like 2-3 hours late) or not at all. When he showed up no adult walked him into the building and he always reeked of weed and said he hadn’t eaten anything that day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We just got our school budget. Our librarian makes $140k. Most teachers make about $130k and they work for 9 months per year and they get a pension.
I am happy for them but people have to stop with pressuring parents to give them gift cards, valentine presents and all the talk about them not being well paid.
By

This is not valid in other states. I am just talking about DCPS and probably DC metro and other big cities.

That’s it 🙂

Yup. I have 20 years experience and am in a senior role at my large nonprofit and make $126. We have had some lovely, lovely teachers and assistants when my kids were at a title 1 elementary, and I was generous with the gifts. But I no longer go overboard or give gifts to individual teachers in middle and hs. They are professionals!

A 20 year teacher with a masters makes 112. https://dcps.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/dcps/page_content/attachments/WTU%20FY20-FY23.pdf

I don't think I can put into words how maddening this thread is

How much do you think that other nonprofit professionals with 20 years of experience and a master's make, and who have similar benefits (except for the summar breaks, week at Christmas and Easter)? Who also have huge drawbacks in their work (which are hard to describe, relatively, because most of us can imagine what it's like to be in a classroom)?

Yes!! AND no pension.

I am the person being quoted starting , "how much do you think other nonprofit professionals..."
You may not get paid during those times, but you are also not working during those times. I find this argument so bizarre- you can get another job, or not, but your ANNUAL salary is X. People who have similar ANNUAL salaries of X ARE working during those times.
I think teachers should be paid more. But they are part of a group of a lot of people who should be paid more. And there is a lot to complain about, I get it, but I could tell you all the things I deal with in my nonprofit and/or government (as someone pointed out) rewarding job (in the sense that it has a mission-based agenda) and it would take a lot longer to explain than many of the teachers would, esp because teachers are more of a monolith than "mission based professiona" is. Which may be why we're not talking about it as much.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We just got our school budget. Our librarian makes $140k. Most teachers make about $130k and they work for 9 months per year and they get a pension.
I am happy for them but people have to stop with pressuring parents to give them gift cards, valentine presents and all the talk about them not being well paid.
By

This is not valid in other states. I am just talking about DCPS and probably DC metro and other big cities.

That’s it 🙂

Yup. I have 20 years experience and am in a senior role at my large nonprofit and make $126. We have had some lovely, lovely teachers and assistants when my kids were at a title 1 elementary, and I was generous with the gifts. But I no longer go overboard or give gifts to individual teachers in middle and hs. They are professionals!

A 20 year teacher with a masters makes 112. https://dcps.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/dcps/page_content/attachments/WTU%20FY20-FY23.pdf

I don't think I can put into words how maddening this thread is

How much do you think that other nonprofit professionals with 20 years of experience and a master's make, and who have similar benefits (except for the summar breaks, week at Christmas and Easter)? Who also have huge drawbacks in their work (which are hard to describe, relatively, because most of us can imagine what it's like to be in a classroom)?

The non profit professionals with 20 years of experience I know get tons of vacation and sick time and work from home 80% of the time.

True. Although the WFH is a new thing post COVID for the large majority of us. We also get vacation but I assure you, very, very very few nonprofit professionals get many weeks off in the summer, and week long breaks here and there.