ACPS Shortest Day

[Anonymous]

Maybe it’s actually the entitlement of millennials that leads to a teacher shortage. The “woe, is me” generation versus the “latch-key, suck it up buttercup generation.” And “woe, is me” teaching “woe, is me’s” kids just proves soul destroying.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here - contract is for a 7.25 hour day.
https://resources.finalsite.net/images/v1679027816/acpsk12vaus/ua6ig8ioryfvhvvunwdd/GAA-StaffTimeSchedules.pdf

A Step 1 Bachelors teacher’s hourly rate is $39.88

WHAT'S YOUR POINT? You seem to be hung up on the hourly rate. Get over yourself.

Point is to highlight the rate of compensation. That is not to say it is adequate or inadequate. When discussing compensation, information and perspective can be helpful. Also, when teachers are holding and making signs about their compensation rate, information may be helpful. There are some jobs that all the money in the world would not drive the person to do - NYC sanitation worker, mortician, Soldier, social worker etc. Is there some of that going on with teaching? Is this a scenario where 10, 20, 30 thousand a year more would not be enough? And, if so, why?

You were trying to stir shit and failed. Now go away, sad troll.

What should teachers be paid as an hourly rate? Maybe contract more hours that can be worked at home to reflect telework flexibility? Not a troll. Why is pointing out commensurate pay so triggering?

Because the initial post was basically “government workers make less based on one specific scale point, why are teachers complaining?”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here - contract is for a 7.25 hour day.
https://resources.finalsite.net/images/v1679027816/acpsk12vaus/ua6ig8ioryfvhvvunwdd/GAA-StaffTimeSchedules.pdf

A Step 1 Bachelors teacher’s hourly rate is $39.88

WHAT'S YOUR POINT? You seem to be hung up on the hourly rate. Get over yourself.

Point is to highlight the rate of compensation. That is not to say it is adequate or inadequate. When discussing compensation, information and perspective can be helpful. Also, when teachers are holding and making signs about their compensation rate, information may be helpful. There are some jobs that all the money in the world would not drive the person to do - NYC sanitation worker, mortician, Soldier, social worker etc. Is there some of that going on with teaching? Is this a scenario where 10, 20, 30 thousand a year more would not be enough? And, if so, why?

You were trying to stir shit and failed. Now go away, sad troll.

What should teachers be paid as an hourly rate? Maybe contract more hours that can be worked at home to reflect telework flexibility? Not a troll. Why is pointing out commensurate pay so triggering?

Because the initial post was basically “government workers make less based on one specific scale point, why are teachers complaining?”

No, it was some government workers in public service jobs (substance abuse counselors, social workers, prosecutors, etc.) make commensurate pay to teachers. There is also an added statistic about the Fairfax County CPS specialist who also makes commensurate (likely less) than a teacher.

[Anonymous]

Point is to highlight the rate of compensation. That is not to say it is adequate or inadequate. When discussing compensation, information and perspective can be helpful. Also, when teachers are holding and making signs about their compensation rate, information may be helpful. There are some jobs that all the money in the world would not drive the person to do - NYC sanitation worker, mortician, Soldier, social worker etc. Is there some of that going on with teaching? Is this a scenario where 10, 20, 30 thousand a year more would not be enough? And, if so, why?

I think we are seeing exactly this and school boards try to throw money at the problem because the causes of teachers’ frustrations are not easily solved without the cooperation of national, state, and local education agencies along with fully funding the needs of students through improved staffing that realistically meets their needs.

I work in a very poor school with terrible test scores and we don’t have the mental health, social services, special education, or general education staffing to adequately meet our students’ needs. My ESOL teachers have 75 kids on their caseloads and can’t truly service them. The special education teachers are trying to teach and deal with behavioral disruptions that pull them from their caseload regularly. To REALLY change the situation for teachers and students, you’d need to hire well over a dozen additional staff members to decrease class sizes and truly serve the mental and special education needs that are affecting their learning—and that would require changing the state’s SOQs so the district could justify the extra personnel. It’s far easier for my district to give everyone a $150 raise for the year with an $300 increase to our health insurance and say “we gave you a raise, why are you complaining?”

[Anonymous]

Why not cut federal and state income taxes for teachers (but only actual teachers, not employees of a school district)? Let them keep all of their pay.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Point is to highlight the rate of compensation. That is not to say it is adequate or inadequate. When discussing compensation, information and perspective can be helpful. Also, when teachers are holding and making signs about their compensation rate, information may be helpful. There are some jobs that all the money in the world would not drive the person to do - NYC sanitation worker, mortician, Soldier, social worker etc. Is there some of that going on with teaching? Is this a scenario where 10, 20, 30 thousand a year more would not be enough? And, if so, why?

I think we are seeing exactly this and school boards try to throw money at the problem because the causes of teachers’ frustrations are not easily solved without the cooperation of national, state, and local education agencies along with fully funding the needs of students through improved staffing that realistically meets their needs.

I work in a very poor school with terrible test scores and we don’t have the mental health, social services, special education, or general education staffing to adequately meet our students’ needs. My ESOL teachers have 75 kids on their caseloads and can’t truly service them. The special education teachers are trying to teach and deal with behavioral disruptions that pull them from their caseload regularly. To REALLY change the situation for teachers and students, you’d need to hire well over a dozen additional staff members to decrease class sizes and truly serve the mental and special education needs that are affecting their learning—and that would require changing the state’s SOQs so the district could justify the extra personnel. It’s far easier for my district to give everyone a $150 raise for the year with an $300 increase to our health insurance and say “we gave you a raise, why are you complaining?”

I think this is such an astute point. Are teacher raises going to make the educational environment better not only for students but all in-school staff? If not, what should the approach be? As a parent, I don’t want to advocate for an expense that will not lead to measurable improvement to include teacher retention and a better education for our kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Point is to highlight the rate of compensation. That is not to say it is adequate or inadequate. When discussing compensation, information and perspective can be helpful. Also, when teachers are holding and making signs about their compensation rate, information may be helpful. There are some jobs that all the money in the world would not drive the person to do - NYC sanitation worker, mortician, Soldier, social worker etc. Is there some of that going on with teaching? Is this a scenario where 10, 20, 30 thousand a year more would not be enough? And, if so, why?

I think we are seeing exactly this and school boards try to throw money at the problem because the causes of teachers’ frustrations are not easily solved without the cooperation of national, state, and local education agencies along with fully funding the needs of students through improved staffing that realistically meets their needs.

I work in a very poor school with terrible test scores and we don’t have the mental health, social services, special education, or general education staffing to adequately meet our students’ needs. My ESOL teachers have 75 kids on their caseloads and can’t truly service them. The special education teachers are trying to teach and deal with behavioral disruptions that pull them from their caseload regularly. To REALLY change the situation for teachers and students, you’d need to hire well over a dozen additional staff members to decrease class sizes and truly serve the mental and special education needs that are affecting their learning—and that would require changing the state’s SOQs so the district could justify the extra personnel. It’s far easier for my district to give everyone a $150 raise for the year with an $300 increase to our health insurance and say “we gave you a raise, why are you complaining?”

I think this is such an astute point. Are teacher raises going to make the educational environment better not only for students but all in-school staff? If not, what should the approach be? As a parent, I don’t want to advocate for an expense that will not lead to measurable improvement to include teacher retention and a better education for our kids.

One thousand percent yes. Another common school district move is to hire “coaches” who are supposedly there to support teachers but can end up holding a bunch of meetings for teachers to go to. It’s much cheaper to put one coach in each building than to hire another teacher per grade (to say nothing of the space restraints) to decrease class sizes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Point is to highlight the rate of compensation. That is not to say it is adequate or inadequate. When discussing compensation, information and perspective can be helpful. Also, when teachers are holding and making signs about their compensation rate, information may be helpful. There are some jobs that all the money in the world would not drive the person to do - NYC sanitation worker, mortician, Soldier, social worker etc. Is there some of that going on with teaching? Is this a scenario where 10, 20, 30 thousand a year more would not be enough? And, if so, why?

I think we are seeing exactly this and school boards try to throw money at the problem because the causes of teachers’ frustrations are not easily solved without the cooperation of national, state, and local education agencies along with fully funding the needs of students through improved staffing that realistically meets their needs.

I work in a very poor school with terrible test scores and we don’t have the mental health, social services, special education, or general education staffing to adequately meet our students’ needs. My ESOL teachers have 75 kids on their caseloads and can’t truly service them. The special education teachers are trying to teach and deal with behavioral disruptions that pull them from their caseload regularly. To REALLY change the situation for teachers and students, you’d need to hire well over a dozen additional staff members to decrease class sizes and truly serve the mental and special education needs that are affecting their learning—and that would require changing the state’s SOQs so the district could justify the extra personnel. It’s far easier for my district to give everyone a $150 raise for the year with an $300 increase to our health insurance and say “we gave you a raise, why are you complaining?”

I think this is such an astute point. Are teacher raises going to make the educational environment better not only for students but all in-school staff? If not, what should the approach be? As a parent, I don’t want to advocate for an expense that will not lead to measurable improvement to include teacher retention and a better education for our kids.

One thousand percent yes. Another common school district move is to hire “coaches” who are supposedly there to support teachers but can end up holding a bunch of meetings for teachers to go to. It’s much cheaper to put one coach in each building than to hire another teacher per grade (to say nothing of the space restraints) to decrease class sizes.

Coaches in our school end up subbing all the time because we don’t get any subs. So no extra meetings for us. But really wish they had time to come observe me because I am a fairly new teacher and could use the feedback.

I think additional pay would encourage people who want to teach but don’t feel like the salary is enough. Every young teacher I know has some type of 5 year plan that doesn’t involve classroom instruction. We have 3 vacancies in our building as it is so the situation seems dire.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Point is to highlight the rate of compensation. That is not to say it is adequate or inadequate. When discussing compensation, information and perspective can be helpful. Also, when teachers are holding and making signs about their compensation rate, information may be helpful. There are some jobs that all the money in the world would not drive the person to do - NYC sanitation worker, mortician, Soldier, social worker etc. Is there some of that going on with teaching? Is this a scenario where 10, 20, 30 thousand a year more would not be enough? And, if so, why?

I think we are seeing exactly this and school boards try to throw money at the problem because the causes of teachers’ frustrations are not easily solved without the cooperation of national, state, and local education agencies along with fully funding the needs of students through improved staffing that realistically meets their needs.

I work in a very poor school with terrible test scores and we don’t have the mental health, social services, special education, or general education staffing to adequately meet our students’ needs. My ESOL teachers have 75 kids on their caseloads and can’t truly service them. The special education teachers are trying to teach and deal with behavioral disruptions that pull them from their caseload regularly. To REALLY change the situation for teachers and students, you’d need to hire well over a dozen additional staff members to decrease class sizes and truly serve the mental and special education needs that are affecting their learning—and that would require changing the state’s SOQs so the district could justify the extra personnel. It’s far easier for my district to give everyone a $150 raise for the year with an $300 increase to our health insurance and say “we gave you a raise, why are you complaining?”

I think this is such an astute point. Are teacher raises going to make the educational environment better not only for students but all in-school staff? If not, what should the approach be? As a parent, I don’t want to advocate for an expense that will not lead to measurable improvement to include teacher retention and a better education for our kids.

One thousand percent yes. Another common school district move is to hire “coaches” who are supposedly there to support teachers but can end up holding a bunch of meetings for teachers to go to. It’s much cheaper to put one coach in each building than to hire another teacher per grade (to say nothing of the space restraints) to decrease class sizes.

Coaches in our school end up subbing all the time because we don’t get any subs. So no extra meetings for us. But really wish they had time to come observe me because I am a fairly new teacher and could use the feedback.

I think additional pay would encourage people who want to teach but don’t feel like the salary is enough. Every young teacher I know has some type of 5 year plan that doesn’t involve classroom instruction. We have 3 vacancies in our building as it is so the situation seems dire.

Interesting - is this a belief that the salary is unworkable for the first few years, and then will get better. The other tide we are fighting is we have relied on teachers in many ways to be a part of dual income households. I suspect demographics are changing in the profession which need to be confronted in a meaningful way. Teaching was/is a great career where a working mom can be home for her kids. But now with the seismic increase of telework I wonder if many working mom teachers are like “larla’s mom just picked her up from school in her dickie, cardigan, and pajama bottoms” and makes more than me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Point is to highlight the rate of compensation. That is not to say it is adequate or inadequate. When discussing compensation, information and perspective can be helpful. Also, when teachers are holding and making signs about their compensation rate, information may be helpful. There are some jobs that all the money in the world would not drive the person to do - NYC sanitation worker, mortician, Soldier, social worker etc. Is there some of that going on with teaching? Is this a scenario where 10, 20, 30 thousand a year more would not be enough? And, if so, why?

I think we are seeing exactly this and school boards try to throw money at the problem because the causes of teachers’ frustrations are not easily solved without the cooperation of national, state, and local education agencies along with fully funding the needs of students through improved staffing that realistically meets their needs.

I work in a very poor school with terrible test scores and we don’t have the mental health, social services, special education, or general education staffing to adequately meet our students’ needs. My ESOL teachers have 75 kids on their caseloads and can’t truly service them. The special education teachers are trying to teach and deal with behavioral disruptions that pull them from their caseload regularly. To REALLY change the situation for teachers and students, you’d need to hire well over a dozen additional staff members to decrease class sizes and truly serve the mental and special education needs that are affecting their learning—and that would require changing the state’s SOQs so the district could justify the extra personnel. It’s far easier for my district to give everyone a $150 raise for the year with an $300 increase to our health insurance and say “we gave you a raise, why are you complaining?”

I think this is such an astute point. Are teacher raises going to make the educational environment better not only for students but all in-school staff? If not, what should the approach be? As a parent, I don’t want to advocate for an expense that will not lead to measurable improvement to include teacher retention and a better education for our kids.

In some parts of the country, raises are absolutely needed. Dire need. But everywhere, there needs to be changes to "working conditions". First and foremost, there needs to be a way to deal with student behavior. Students who are repeatedly physically aggressive need to be removed as well as those who throw out threats like candy. What I've seen is months or years (yes, years) of "interventions" to avoid a full IEP. Either the school doesn't want to give the student an IEP or they do and the parents don't want it. There needs to be a way to fast track kids into an IEP and into a self contained room for kids who are too out of control or violent. If that student responds to interventions within a self contained room, then and only then should a very slow process begin to return to a gen ed room with tons of support.
Most kids with IEPs are not violent, but most violent kids need IEPs, if that makes sense. We need many, many, many more sped teachers with skills to help such kids and more special schools that can attempt to help these kids until they are 18.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Point is to highlight the rate of compensation. That is not to say it is adequate or inadequate. When discussing compensation, information and perspective can be helpful. Also, when teachers are holding and making signs about their compensation rate, information may be helpful. There are some jobs that all the money in the world would not drive the person to do - NYC sanitation worker, mortician, Soldier, social worker etc. Is there some of that going on with teaching? Is this a scenario where 10, 20, 30 thousand a year more would not be enough? And, if so, why?

I think we are seeing exactly this and school boards try to throw money at the problem because the causes of teachers’ frustrations are not easily solved without the cooperation of national, state, and local education agencies along with fully funding the needs of students through improved staffing that realistically meets their needs.

I work in a very poor school with terrible test scores and we don’t have the mental health, social services, special education, or general education staffing to adequately meet our students’ needs. My ESOL teachers have 75 kids on their caseloads and can’t truly service them. The special education teachers are trying to teach and deal with behavioral disruptions that pull them from their caseload regularly. To REALLY change the situation for teachers and students, you’d need to hire well over a dozen additional staff members to decrease class sizes and truly serve the mental and special education needs that are affecting their learning—and that would require changing the state’s SOQs so the district could justify the extra personnel. It’s far easier for my district to give everyone a $150 raise for the year with an $300 increase to our health insurance and say “we gave you a raise, why are you complaining?”

I think this is such an astute point. Are teacher raises going to make the educational environment better not only for students but all in-school staff? If not, what should the approach be? As a parent, I don’t want to advocate for an expense that will not lead to measurable improvement to include teacher retention and a better education for our kids.

One thousand percent yes. Another common school district move is to hire “coaches” who are supposedly there to support teachers but can end up holding a bunch of meetings for teachers to go to. It’s much cheaper to put one coach in each building than to hire another teacher per grade (to say nothing of the space restraints) to decrease class sizes.

Coaches in our school end up subbing all the time because we don’t get any subs. So no extra meetings for us. But really wish they had time to come observe me because I am a fairly new teacher and could use the feedback.

I think additional pay would encourage people who want to teach but don’t feel like the salary is enough. Every young teacher I know has some type of 5 year plan that doesn’t involve classroom instruction. We have 3 vacancies in our building as it is so the situation seems dire.

Interesting - is this a belief that the salary is unworkable for the first few years, and then will get better. The other tide we are fighting is we have relied on teachers in many ways to be a part of dual income households. I suspect demographics are changing in the profession which need to be confronted in a meaningful way. Teaching was/is a great career where a working mom can be home for her kids. But now with the seismic increase of telework I wonder if many working mom teachers are like “larla’s mom just picked her up from school in her dickie, cardigan, and pajama bottoms” and makes more than me.

This is a major factor. We have had many teachers and administrators leave and enter the private sector, work from home, and make more. Or else they don’t make more but don’t have the daily stress of classroom teaching. I am a veteran teacher and I won’t leave but I see why younger teachers are making that decision.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Point is to highlight the rate of compensation. That is not to say it is adequate or inadequate. When discussing compensation, information and perspective can be helpful. Also, when teachers are holding and making signs about their compensation rate, information may be helpful. There are some jobs that all the money in the world would not drive the person to do - NYC sanitation worker, mortician, Soldier, social worker etc. Is there some of that going on with teaching? Is this a scenario where 10, 20, 30 thousand a year more would not be enough? And, if so, why?

I think we are seeing exactly this and school boards try to throw money at the problem because the causes of teachers’ frustrations are not easily solved without the cooperation of national, state, and local education agencies along with fully funding the needs of students through improved staffing that realistically meets their needs.

I work in a very poor school with terrible test scores and we don’t have the mental health, social services, special education, or general education staffing to adequately meet our students’ needs. My ESOL teachers have 75 kids on their caseloads and can’t truly service them. The special education teachers are trying to teach and deal with behavioral disruptions that pull them from their caseload regularly. To REALLY change the situation for teachers and students, you’d need to hire well over a dozen additional staff members to decrease class sizes and truly serve the mental and special education needs that are affecting their learning—and that would require changing the state’s SOQs so the district could justify the extra personnel. It’s far easier for my district to give everyone a $150 raise for the year with an $300 increase to our health insurance and say “we gave you a raise, why are you complaining?”

I think this is such an astute point. Are teacher raises going to make the educational environment better not only for students but all in-school staff? If not, what should the approach be? As a parent, I don’t want to advocate for an expense that will not lead to measurable improvement to include teacher retention and a better education for our kids.

One thousand percent yes. Another common school district move is to hire “coaches” who are supposedly there to support teachers but can end up holding a bunch of meetings for teachers to go to. It’s much cheaper to put one coach in each building than to hire another teacher per grade (to say nothing of the space restraints) to decrease class sizes.

Coaches in our school end up subbing all the time because we don’t get any subs. So no extra meetings for us. But really wish they had time to come observe me because I am a fairly new teacher and could use the feedback.

I think additional pay would encourage people who want to teach but don’t feel like the salary is enough. Every young teacher I know has some type of 5 year plan that doesn’t involve classroom instruction. We have 3 vacancies in our building as it is so the situation seems dire.

Interesting - is this a belief that the salary is unworkable for the first few years, and then will get better. The other tide we are fighting is we have relied on teachers in many ways to be a part of dual income households. I suspect demographics are changing in the profession which need to be confronted in a meaningful way. Teaching was/is a great career where a working mom can be home for her kids. But now with the seismic increase of telework I wonder if many working mom teachers are like “larla’s mom just picked her up from school in her dickie, cardigan, and pajama bottoms” and makes more than me.

This is a major factor. We have had many teachers and administrators leave and enter the private sector, work from home, and make more. Or else they don’t make more but don’t have the daily stress of classroom teaching. I am a veteran teacher and I won’t leave but I see why younger teachers are making that decision.

Thank you for sticking with it!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Point is to highlight the rate of compensation. That is not to say it is adequate or inadequate. When discussing compensation, information and perspective can be helpful. Also, when teachers are holding and making signs about their compensation rate, information may be helpful. There are some jobs that all the money in the world would not drive the person to do - NYC sanitation worker, mortician, Soldier, social worker etc. Is there some of that going on with teaching? Is this a scenario where 10, 20, 30 thousand a year more would not be enough? And, if so, why?

I think we are seeing exactly this and school boards try to throw money at the problem because the causes of teachers’ frustrations are not easily solved without the cooperation of national, state, and local education agencies along with fully funding the needs of students through improved staffing that realistically meets their needs.

I work in a very poor school with terrible test scores and we don’t have the mental health, social services, special education, or general education staffing to adequately meet our students’ needs. My ESOL teachers have 75 kids on their caseloads and can’t truly service them. The special education teachers are trying to teach and deal with behavioral disruptions that pull them from their caseload regularly. To REALLY change the situation for teachers and students, you’d need to hire well over a dozen additional staff members to decrease class sizes and truly serve the mental and special education needs that are affecting their learning—and that would require changing the state’s SOQs so the district could justify the extra personnel. It’s far easier for my district to give everyone a $150 raise for the year with an $300 increase to our health insurance and say “we gave you a raise, why are you complaining?”

I think this is such an astute point. Are teacher raises going to make the educational environment better not only for students but all in-school staff? If not, what should the approach be? As a parent, I don’t want to advocate for an expense that will not lead to measurable improvement to include teacher retention and a better education for our kids.

One thousand percent yes. Another common school district move is to hire “coaches” who are supposedly there to support teachers but can end up holding a bunch of meetings for teachers to go to. It’s much cheaper to put one coach in each building than to hire another teacher per grade (to say nothing of the space restraints) to decrease class sizes.

Coaches in our school end up subbing all the time because we don’t get any subs. So no extra meetings for us. But really wish they had time to come observe me because I am a fairly new teacher and could use the feedback.

I think additional pay would encourage people who want to teach but don’t feel like the salary is enough. Every young teacher I know has some type of 5 year plan that doesn’t involve classroom instruction. We have 3 vacancies in our building as it is so the situation seems dire.

Interesting - is this a belief that the salary is unworkable for the first few years, and then will get better. The other tide we are fighting is we have relied on teachers in many ways to be a part of dual income households. I suspect demographics are changing in the profession which need to be confronted in a meaningful way. Teaching was/is a great career where a working mom can be home for her kids. But now with the seismic increase of telework I wonder if many working mom teachers are like “larla’s mom just picked her up from school in her dickie, cardigan, and pajama bottoms” and makes more than me.

This is a major factor. We have had many teachers and administrators leave and enter the private sector, work from home, and make more. Or else they don’t make more but don’t have the daily stress of classroom teaching. I am a veteran teacher and I won’t leave but I see why younger teachers are making that decision.

A big part of the divide between older teachers staying and younger ones leaving is that the pension situation is very different. If you’re on the hybrid plan (after 2001?) it’s much less valuable and easier to make the call.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Point is to highlight the rate of compensation. That is not to say it is adequate or inadequate. When discussing compensation, information and perspective can be helpful. Also, when teachers are holding and making signs about their compensation rate, information may be helpful. There are some jobs that all the money in the world would not drive the person to do - NYC sanitation worker, mortician, Soldier, social worker etc. Is there some of that going on with teaching? Is this a scenario where 10, 20, 30 thousand a year more would not be enough? And, if so, why?

I think we are seeing exactly this and school boards try to throw money at the problem because the causes of teachers’ frustrations are not easily solved without the cooperation of national, state, and local education agencies along with fully funding the needs of students through improved staffing that realistically meets their needs.

I work in a very poor school with terrible test scores and we don’t have the mental health, social services, special education, or general education staffing to adequately meet our students’ needs. My ESOL teachers have 75 kids on their caseloads and can’t truly service them. The special education teachers are trying to teach and deal with behavioral disruptions that pull them from their caseload regularly. To REALLY change the situation for teachers and students, you’d need to hire well over a dozen additional staff members to decrease class sizes and truly serve the mental and special education needs that are affecting their learning—and that would require changing the state’s SOQs so the district could justify the extra personnel. It’s far easier for my district to give everyone a $150 raise for the year with an $300 increase to our health insurance and say “we gave you a raise, why are you complaining?”

I think this is such an astute point. Are teacher raises going to make the educational environment better not only for students but all in-school staff? If not, what should the approach be? As a parent, I don’t want to advocate for an expense that will not lead to measurable improvement to include teacher retention and a better education for our kids.

One thousand percent yes. Another common school district move is to hire “coaches” who are supposedly there to support teachers but can end up holding a bunch of meetings for teachers to go to. It’s much cheaper to put one coach in each building than to hire another teacher per grade (to say nothing of the space restraints) to decrease class sizes.

Coaches in our school end up subbing all the time because we don’t get any subs. So no extra meetings for us. But really wish they had time to come observe me because I am a fairly new teacher and could use the feedback.

I think additional pay would encourage people who want to teach but don’t feel like the salary is enough. Every young teacher I know has some type of 5 year plan that doesn’t involve classroom instruction. We have 3 vacancies in our building as it is so the situation seems dire.

Interesting - is this a belief that the salary is unworkable for the first few years, and then will get better. The other tide we are fighting is we have relied on teachers in many ways to be a part of dual income households. I suspect demographics are changing in the profession which need to be confronted in a meaningful way. Teaching was/is a great career where a working mom can be home for her kids. But now with the seismic increase of telework I wonder if many working mom teachers are like “larla’s mom just picked her up from school in her dickie, cardigan, and pajama bottoms” and makes more than me.

This is a major factor. We have had many teachers and administrators leave and enter the private sector, work from home, and make more. Or else they don’t make more but don’t have the daily stress of classroom teaching. I am a veteran teacher and I won’t leave but I see why younger teachers are making that decision.

A big part of the divide between older teachers staying and younger ones leaving is that the pension situation is very different. If you’re on the hybrid plan (after 2001?) it’s much less valuable and easier to make the call.

Absolutely this... they have significantly cut retirement pensions and benefits for new teachers entering. That used to be a perk for teaching. Combine that with lower pay and watching other people work from home with less education makes a good case for younger teachers to leave the field for something else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Point is to highlight the rate of compensation. That is not to say it is adequate or inadequate. When discussing compensation, information and perspective can be helpful. Also, when teachers are holding and making signs about their compensation rate, information may be helpful. There are some jobs that all the money in the world would not drive the person to do - NYC sanitation worker, mortician, Soldier, social worker etc. Is there some of that going on with teaching? Is this a scenario where 10, 20, 30 thousand a year more would not be enough? And, if so, why?

I think we are seeing exactly this and school boards try to throw money at the problem because the causes of teachers’ frustrations are not easily solved without the cooperation of national, state, and local education agencies along with fully funding the needs of students through improved staffing that realistically meets their needs.

I work in a very poor school with terrible test scores and we don’t have the mental health, social services, special education, or general education staffing to adequately meet our students’ needs. My ESOL teachers have 75 kids on their caseloads and can’t truly service them. The special education teachers are trying to teach and deal with behavioral disruptions that pull them from their caseload regularly. To REALLY change the situation for teachers and students, you’d need to hire well over a dozen additional staff members to decrease class sizes and truly serve the mental and special education needs that are affecting their learning—and that would require changing the state’s SOQs so the district could justify the extra personnel. It’s far easier for my district to give everyone a $150 raise for the year with an $300 increase to our health insurance and say “we gave you a raise, why are you complaining?”

I think this is such an astute point. Are teacher raises going to make the educational environment better not only for students but all in-school staff? If not, what should the approach be? As a parent, I don’t want to advocate for an expense that will not lead to measurable improvement to include teacher retention and a better education for our kids.

One thousand percent yes. Another common school district move is to hire “coaches” who are supposedly there to support teachers but can end up holding a bunch of meetings for teachers to go to. It’s much cheaper to put one coach in each building than to hire another teacher per grade (to say nothing of the space restraints) to decrease class sizes.

Coaches in our school end up subbing all the time because we don’t get any subs. So no extra meetings for us. But really wish they had time to come observe me because I am a fairly new teacher and could use the feedback.

I think additional pay would encourage people who want to teach but don’t feel like the salary is enough. Every young teacher I know has some type of 5 year plan that doesn’t involve classroom instruction. We have 3 vacancies in our building as it is so the situation seems dire.

Interesting - is this a belief that the salary is unworkable for the first few years, and then will get better. The other tide we are fighting is we have relied on teachers in many ways to be a part of dual income households. I suspect demographics are changing in the profession which need to be confronted in a meaningful way. Teaching was/is a great career where a working mom can be home for her kids. But now with the seismic increase of telework I wonder if many working mom teachers are like “larla’s mom just picked her up from school in her dickie, cardigan, and pajama bottoms” and makes more than me.

This is a major factor. We have had many teachers and administrators leave and enter the private sector, work from home, and make more. Or else they don’t make more but don’t have the daily stress of classroom teaching. I am a veteran teacher and I won’t leave but I see why younger teachers are making that decision.

A big part of the divide between older teachers staying and younger ones leaving is that the pension situation is very different. If you’re on the hybrid plan (after 2001?) it’s much less valuable and easier to make the call.

Absolutely this... they have significantly cut retirement pensions and benefits for new teachers entering. That used to be a perk for teaching. Combine that with lower pay and watching other people work from home with less education makes a good case for younger teachers to leave the field for something else.

This puts me at a “what should a school district and board prioritize?” In ACPS there is a loud demand for more money now, but will that do anything?