Care to know how much $$$$ the administration at your school is raking in?! Disgusting.

[Anonymous]

1329--are you serious? Do you have any idea what it takes in terms of education and work to become a partner..not to mention that not all people have the smarts to even get in a law school. A trash man just needs to be in shape enough to lift bags and show up. FYI--trash man make good money for having almost not credentials. This thread is annoying..I am thinking the same people who are indignant over how many administratioin makes are probably the FA families who are driving up the cost of schools. Here's an idea..stop taking FA and the teachers can take that money and make more.

[Anonymous]

I agree teachers should be paid more, however, there are some facts to consider. At most private schools teachers do not have to have the same credentials required at public. They don't even have to be licensed. They get much smaller class sizes and often an easier group of students. Yes, the parents canbe high maintenance, but at many of these schools the teachers are allowed to accept ridiculous group cash gifts from classes and they get other perks the public school teachers don't get.

Also, at some private schools men get paid more than woman because there is such a need for male teachers. This may not still be the case, but it was the case in the past for some. In fact, one catholic school I know of even paid more for each child a male teacher had so there was actually incentive to have more kids perhaps for the whole family guy image and to keep men working there?

Now that all said, sadly the more parents donate the more these salaries will increase and new positions will be created for even more "development" people. Private schools need donations, but it's a shame a line can't be drawn to say we will only give if the money goes directly toward A, B and C rather than hiring more people to ask for more money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I agree teachers should be paid more, however, there are some facts to consider. At most private schools teachers do not have to have the same credentials required at public. They don't even have to be licensed. They get much smaller class sizes and often an easier group of students. Yes, the parents canbe high maintenance, but at many of these schools the teachers are allowed to accept ridiculous group cash gifts from classes and they get other perks the public school teachers don't get.

Also, at some private schools men get paid more than woman because there is such a need for male teachers. This may not still be the case, but it was the case in the past for some. In fact, one catholic school I know of even paid more for each child a male teacher had so there was actually incentive to have more kids perhaps for the whole family guy image and to keep men working there?

Now that all said, sadly the more parents donate the more these salaries will increase and new positions will be created for even more "development" people. Private schools need donations, but it's a shame a line can't be drawn to say we will only give if the money goes directly toward A, B and C rather than hiring more people to ask for more money.

That is SUCH bs and it only makes me even happier that I've leftthe Church!! Good riddance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Holton head of lower school should be paid more -- he is great ...

Agreed

[Anonymous]

GDS must really love their HoS to give a $126,366 raise in one year. I wonder if any teachers got a salary increase that year. Priorities, priorities!

2007 HoS salary = $442,097
2008 HoS salary = $568,463

Now, if Sidwell would only make their 990 public we could see what their admins are currently making.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:GDS must really love their HoS to give a $126,366 raise in one year. I wonder if any teachers got a salary increase that year. Priorities, priorities!

2007 HoS salary = $442,097
2008 HoS salary = $568,463

Now, if Sidwell would only make their 990 public we could see what their admins are currently making.

Isn't 2008 the year he left? Maybe it was a retirement bonus of some sort - there are schools who do that.

[Anonymous]

Salaries in the private sector are determined by supply and demand. Simple as that. Let's not make this a moral issue.

[Anonymous]

Come on pp, the issue isn't supply and demand, it is the difference between the top and the bottom that people are complaining about. If the top HOS makes 10xs that of the average teacher, it is a legitimate question to know why and how a school comes up with it compensation philosophy. Granted, this ratio is better than at your average corporation, but I think anything over $275k (Michelle Rhee's salary I believe which was a job WAY, WAY harder than any private school head) is pay that could be directed at teachers.

[Anonymous]

I think that the 2009 data had the average CEO making 264x what the average employee makes in the US (down from 500x+ earlier in the decade). 11:1 is Japanese ratio that's held up as more responsible.

Re comparing Rhee to private school Heads. The latter have fundraising roles which often influences compensation. Not to mention that Rhee had virtually no qualifications for heading a school (much less a school system). And salary wasn't her whole compensation package.

In general, we're not a culture in which level of compensation is a function of how hard a job is.

Re redirecting administrative compensation to teachers -- it wouldn't go far given the small number of administrators vs. the large number of teachers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:GDS must really love their HoS to give a $126,366 raise in one year. I wonder if any teachers got a salary increase that year. Priorities, priorities!

2007 HoS salary = $442,097
2008 HoS salary = $568,463

Now, if Sidwell would only make their 990 public we could see what their admins are currently making.

Isn't 2008 the year he left? Maybe it was a retirement bonus of some sort - there are schools who do that.

I'm guessing it was some sort of retirement package. Peter Branch had led the school for over a quarter of a century, and saw the school go through major, major changes. For better or for worse, he transformed GDS from a small, alternative school for the children of progressive DC parents into the school it is today. Of course, all of this required the skill of an extremely talented fund raiser.

I doubt that the new HoS--who is much younger, much less experienced, with no track record at GDS--is receiving the same salary that Branch left with.

[Anonymous]

So is HoS a standard abbreviation or was it chosen to dramatize the theme of this thread?

[Anonymous]

Administrators hire the teachers and the teachers report to the Administrators. Is there a profession where the employees make more money than the bosses?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Come on pp, the issue isn't supply and demand, it is the difference between the top and the bottom that people are complaining about. If the top HOS makes 10xs that of the average teacher, it is a legitimate question to know why and how a school comes up with it compensation philosophy. Granted, this ratio is better than at your average corporation, but I think anything over $275k (Michelle Rhee's salary I believe which was a job WAY, WAY harder than any private school head) is pay that could be directed at teachers.

The wage inequality also reflects supply and demand. Besides, teachers are not in this line of business for the money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:1329--are you serious? Do you have any idea what it takes in terms of education and work to become a partner..not to mention that not all people have the smarts to even get in a law school. A trash man just needs to be in shape enough to lift bags and show up. FYI--trash man make good money for having almost not credentials. This thread is annoying..I am thinking the same people who are indignant over how many administratioin makes are probably the FA families who are driving up the cost of schools. Here's an idea..stop taking FA and the teachers can take that money and make more.

Do you have any idea what it takes in terms of actual work (you know, the kind that actually involves something more than spending hundreds of billing hours figuring out innovative ways to inflate billing hours) that goes into trying to house, feed, and educate a family when you work 6 days a week for 12+ hours a day with no days off and no health care? I know it's a fun lark to perpetuate the idea that those who have deserve everything they got, while those that don't have only lack through their own genetic and character flaws, because it helps you feel that much more smug and self-righteous in your petty little bubble of self-delusion. But perhaps the genius of the American Experiment has been that the great unwashed "common" people have opportunities through the much-reviled FA to better the lives of their children. Of course, the challenge of such a system is that it makes pompous asses like you have to actually compete to some degree against talented newcomers, rather than simply against other inbred morons who also think that "working for it" and "being born into it" are the same thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Come on pp, the issue isn't supply and demand, it is the difference between the top and the bottom that people are complaining about. If the top HOS makes 10xs that of the average teacher, it is a legitimate question to know why and how a school comes up with it compensation philosophy. Granted, this ratio is better than at your average corporation, but I think anything over $275k (Michelle Rhee's salary I believe which was a job WAY, WAY harder than any private school head) is pay that could be directed at teachers.

The wage inequality also reflects supply and demand. Besides, teachers are not in this line of business for the money.

No, teachers are there for the privilege of being surrounded by your spoiled children. WTF! Of course teachers deserve a decent salary. If you really cared about the actual education your children are receiving, you would care that the tuition you are paying is going to the people who are actually doing the educating. If the majority of the money is being spent on administration while the teachers barely get paid enough to get by, that tells me the school - and the parents that pay for such a school - cares more about its "brand".