How do we get top students (as defined by high school SAT and GPA) to enter public school teaching?

[Anonymous]

My first thought was, stop talking about how stupid teachers are. I have a BA with a double major (neither in education), an MA in one of those areas, an M.Ed, and every academic honor I could earn, but evvvverybody loves to tell me how stupid teachers are.

No doubt some are, but I've met a fair few like myself. Start changing the way you talk about teachers now to change perceptions if you want to recruit more high achievers down the line.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Start paying teachers double or triple what they make now and I guarantee more high achievers will enter the field. Instead of a 4 year program, teaching should be a 5-6 year program. All classrooms with severe behaviors should get a co-teacher (not an aide). And the higher ups should have to return to the classroom for a year every 6-8 years.

Fwiw, I'm in a school that is low income/middle income. We have staff from some very good universities. I'm not 100% convinced someone with a high ACT score makes a better teacher though. I think a better question would be, are we as individual tax payers ready to pay significantly higher taxes to attract and keep the students you mention in your question.

But that means it’s going to cost students more money and time. Is that necessary?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Start paying teachers double or triple what they make now and I guarantee more high achievers will enter the field. Instead of a 4 year program, teaching should be a 5-6 year program. All classrooms with severe behaviors should get a co-teacher (not an aide). And the higher ups should have to return to the classroom for a year every 6-8 years.

Fwiw, I'm in a school that is low income/middle income. We have staff from some very good universities. I'm not 100% convinced someone with a high ACT score makes a better teacher though. I think a better question would be, are we as individual tax payers ready to pay significantly higher taxes to attract and keep the students you mention in your question.

But that means it’s going to cost students more money and time. Is that necessary?

Yes it’s necessary and their salary should reflect their additional training.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Start paying teachers double or triple what they make now and I guarantee more high achievers will enter the field. Instead of a 4 year program, teaching should be a 5-6 year program. All classrooms with severe behaviors should get a co-teacher (not an aide). And the higher ups should have to return to the classroom for a year every 6-8 years.

Fwiw, I'm in a school that is low income/middle income. We have staff from some very good universities. I'm not 100% convinced someone with a high ACT score makes a better teacher though. I think a better question would be, are we as individual tax payers ready to pay significantly higher taxes to attract and keep the students you mention in your question.

But that means it’s going to cost students more money and time. Is that necessary?

Yes it’s necessary and their salary should reflect their additional training.

I’d argue that’s credential inflation. Just more money in the universities’ pockets. More years in school doesn’t equate to better teaching.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Start paying teachers double or triple what they make now and I guarantee more high achievers will enter the field. Instead of a 4 year program, teaching should be a 5-6 year program. All classrooms with severe behaviors should get a co-teacher (not an aide). And the higher ups should have to return to the classroom for a year every 6-8 years.

Fwiw, I'm in a school that is low income/middle income. We have staff from some very good universities. I'm not 100% convinced someone with a high ACT score makes a better teacher though. I think a better question would be, are we as individual tax payers ready to pay significantly higher taxes to attract and keep the students you mention in your question.

But that means it’s going to cost students more money and time. Is that necessary?

Yes it’s necessary and their salary should reflect their additional training.

I’d argue that’s credential inflation. Just more money in the universities’ pockets. More years in school doesn’t equate to better teaching.

Then make it a 2 year paid internship but first year teachers need more experience before being left on their own. The system is broken don’t ask how to fix it then argue change isn’t necessary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Start paying teachers double or triple what they make now and I guarantee more high achievers will enter the field. Instead of a 4 year program, teaching should be a 5-6 year program. All classrooms with severe behaviors should get a co-teacher (not an aide). And the higher ups should have to return to the classroom for a year every 6-8 years.

Fwiw, I'm in a school that is low income/middle income. We have staff from some very good universities. I'm not 100% convinced someone with a high ACT score makes a better teacher though. I think a better question would be, are we as individual tax payers ready to pay significantly higher taxes to attract and keep the students you mention in your question.

But that means it’s going to cost students more money and time. Is that necessary?

Yes it’s necessary and their salary should reflect their additional training.

I’d argue that’s credential inflation. Just more money in the universities’ pockets. More years in school doesn’t equate to better teaching.

Then make it a 2 year paid internship but first year teachers need more experience before being left on their own. The system is broken don’t ask how to fix it then argue change isn’t necessary.

I agree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Start paying teachers double or triple what they make now and I guarantee more high achievers will enter the field. Instead of a 4 year program, teaching should be a 5-6 year program. All classrooms with severe behaviors should get a co-teacher (not an aide). And the higher ups should have to return to the classroom for a year every 6-8 years.

Fwiw, I'm in a school that is low income/middle income. We have staff from some very good universities. I'm not 100% convinced someone with a high ACT score makes a better teacher though. I think a better question would be, are we as individual tax payers ready to pay significantly higher taxes to attract and keep the students you mention in your question.

But that means it’s going to cost students more money and time. Is that necessary?

Yes it’s necessary and their salary should reflect their additional training.

I’d argue that’s credential inflation. Just more money in the universities’ pockets. More years in school doesn’t equate to better teaching.

NP here. Make the last two years a paid teaching job under a mentor teacher rather than under a university. They should be teaching in the same room. Make reflective teaching a regular practice between the mentor and mentee. Have the program end in national board certification. Pay them adequately and/or reduce classroom hours so teachers have more time for the additional responsibilities: planning, grading, meetings, conferences, etc (more in-line with teaching load in other countries. Add additional specials time for coverage.

[Anonymous]

I think a lot of education professors at universities are out of touch with what K-12 teaching is really like these days.
Many have not set foot in a classroom in years

[Anonymous]

Subject specialization should be encouraged especially for high school teachers.
Maybe pay more for subjects that are hard to fill. Physics and CS teachers make the same pay as PE teachers. Obviously schools have a very hard time finding good Physics and CS teachers. Pay them more as they have plenty of other job opportunities that are easier and pay more

[Anonymous]

People, smart or not, can make significantly more money and put up with less crap from colleagues (students, parents and bad admins) doing other things. Plus, teachers are disparaged nonstop. Why would ANYONE encourage their child to be a teacher?

[Anonymous]

The education degree itself doesn't have much substance. Intellectual kids would be bored and cynical in these classes. Just let them major in subject matter and take one class on classroom management before student teaching. This is a "learn on the job" profession.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People, smart or not, can make significantly more money and put up with less crap from colleagues (students, parents and bad admins) doing other things. Plus, teachers are disparaged nonstop. Why would ANYONE encourage their child to be a teacher?

That is how it is currently.

[Anonymous]

I was a top student in high school - NMS finalist, top 1% of my graduating class, Ivy grad.
I became an elementary school teacher. I teach very poor children.
I love my work and how much I can make a difference in children’s lives. I’m sad that I do not have the career success that many of my classmates have, though.

There are systematic problems with public schools (I have taught in three states) that no amount of intelligence in teachers will be able to fix, although I see smart, experienced teachers quietly circumventing poor curricular choices by using their own methods.

[Anonymous]

In my view, “majoring in elementary education” has to become a more valid degree. Now it’s too often a way to skate through college for young women who are there to have a good time. This does not appeal generally to the brightest students.

[Anonymous]

I’m a high school teacher and last month I had a little talk with one of my best students. She had proudly come to tell me that she wants to be a teacher. I strongly advised her to reconsider: as I explained, parents and students do not respect teachers, and she will be mocked, derided, and second-guessed on a near-regular basis at work. She was actually said that she is aware of the way her classmates and their parents treat teachers and talk to/about them, but had “though it didn’t bother the teachers.” I told her, quite bluntly, that on some days it bothers me quite a lot. Occasionally I cry when I get home.

I also explained that during the beginning of the pandemic, I became fully aware of just how little teachers are respected.

I am sure some of you will now tell me I am a bad teacher and should quit because the profession doesn’t need me. I assure you that I am considered one of the best teachers in our department. I have a degree from Harvard, and this impresses parents enough that they actually treat me slightly better than some of my equally-deserving colleagues. But if I could go back, I would choose another career.

I hate the disrespect, entitlement, grade-grubbing and attempts by parents to bully me into inflating their darlings’ grades, and the sheer volume of work I am expected to accomplish outside of school.

I began my career starry-eyed with enthusiasm. 16 years of pushy, disrespectful parents, plus one pandemic in which it was made clear that I was expected to sacrifice myself for other people’s children (while these people “worked from home” themselves), and I now hate my job. If I could think of a way to transition into a new career now, I would, but I can’t.