Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm fine with it. Entry level employees make the least. Experienced executives make 200K+. Makes sense to me.

Okay. Please tell me what these "experienced executives" are doing that makes them so valuable to FCPS.

I mean, if you don't know what executives such as a CFO or a COO do, I'm not sure I'm going to waste my time explaining it to you, but I will ask you who the hell do you think you are insinuating that what they do isn't valuable? Where do you get off?

The nerve of you. Wow, just wow.

The problem is that the “executives” here aren’t making schools more efficient or productive. They are doing the opposite by creating unnecessary work for teachers and insisting we implement idealistic and unproven pedagogical theories (such as inclusion) that are practically impossible to make function smoothly in the classrooms. They spend millions on contracts for flawed resources that we can’t use, and are willing to replace a sharp knife with a dull one for “reasons” that turn out to be false. No, schoology does not easily integrate with SIS to make grading easier for teachers.

Currently, Gatehouse is pushing teachers to integrate AI into the classroom and we have a new contract with chatgpt - that push comes from people who want to sell tech, not teach children. It is a corporate interest, not an educational one.

Gatehouse folks occupy a sphere that doesn’t truly “govern” the parts of education that are actually still working for your kids. Teachers work around the BS handed down to us to be effective.

Anonymous wrote:

That said, I think there are way too many administrators at FCPS and they could help the budget by cutting some of them. It's so bloated and they aren't actually helping improve our kids' education.

Agree 100%.

Plus, we have discussed for more than a year, the:

- failed-principal to Gatehouse pipeline.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm fine with it. Entry level employees make the least. Experienced executives make 200K+. Makes sense to me.

Okay. Please tell me what these "experienced executives" are doing that makes them so valuable to FCPS.

I mean, if you don't know what executives such as a CFO or a COO do, I'm not sure I'm going to waste my time explaining it to you, but I will ask you who the hell do you think you are insinuating that what they do isn't valuable? Where do you get off?

The nerve of you. Wow, just wow.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Fairfax County Public Schools pays its teachers a starting annual salary of $61,747 as it gives 44 of its district administrators over $200,000 per year. Meanwhile, student performance is abysmal, + teachers are paying for their own classroom supplies.


Is this fair and equitable?

I'd like to see a breakdown of what these people do.
How many work from home?

What do they do that has a direct effect on student achievement and progress.

How many work in Reid's communication factory?

What does working from home have to do with anything? What a weird comment. As is the question about who works in communications.

Anonymous wrote: Fairfax County Public Schools pays its teachers a starting annual salary of $61,747 as it gives 44 of its district administrators over $200,000 per year. Meanwhile, student performance is abysmal, + teachers are paying for their own classroom supplies.


Is this fair and equitable?

Yes. Next question.

Anonymous wrote:I'm fine with it. Entry level employees make the least. Experienced executives make 200K+. Makes sense to me.

Okay. Please tell me what these "experienced executives" are doing that makes them so valuable to FCPS.

I'm assuming thats a full year position

I'm fine with it. Entry level employees make the least. Experienced executives make 200K+. Makes sense to me.

Anonymous wrote:This argument doesn't make sense at all. Why would the starting salary of a teacher compare to a District Administrator who most likely has many more years of experience under their belt in addition to higher levels of responsibility and mostly likely education?

You can look up any FCPS employee's salary online - it is public knowledge and there are a large number of classroom teachers earning over $100K who are 10 year teachers or more.

I think $61,747/year starting salary for a 39-week contract with 3-6% raises each year is actually quite fair. If the payrate remained the same and teachers worked a 52-week year like most other salaried professionals, that starting salary would be over $82K.

Now, if you want to have a discussion about the amount of crap that teachers have to deal with from parents, students, and administrators, then that is another conversation with another set of solutions other than throwing more money at teachers to make all of the crap "worth it."

Teachers work 195 contract days excluding sick days. Average employed college educated person in the US works 235 days when you factor in holidays and PTO excluding sick days. That equates to teachers working 82.98% of a normal work schedule. Which makes starting teacher salary comparable to $74,300 salary. That is not terrible considering that teaching salary scales are setup to reward longevity and flush out those that are not willing to continue making funding education cheaper because you always have a big percentage of young teachers just getting started.

Anonymous wrote:This argument doesn't make sense at all. Why would the starting salary of a teacher compare to a District Administrator who most likely has many more years of experience under their belt in addition to higher levels of responsibility and mostly likely education?

You can look up any FCPS employee's salary online - it is public knowledge and there are a large number of classroom teachers earning over $100K who are 10 year teachers or more.

I think $61,747/year starting salary for a 39-week contract with 3-6% raises each year is actually quite fair. If the payrate remained the same and teachers worked a 52-week year like most other salaried professionals, that starting salary would be over $82K.

Now, if you want to have a discussion about the amount of crap that teachers have to deal with from parents, students, and administrators, then that is another conversation with another set of solutions other than throwing more money at teachers to make all of the crap "worth it."

The question is not about their experience. The question is what do they do for the school system that benefits our students? And, what does their office bring to benefit our students.

Just take a look at Reid's PR department. Look at all the videos posted about her. Look at all the messages from her touting her comings and goings.

Please list what Reid and her people have done to make FCPS better for our students.

I fail to see how the following have made it better:

Expensive legal cases.
A bumbling roll out of a new school. While it may not affect all of FCPS, it is a premium example of lack of common sense leadership.
A terrible redistricting process that accomplishes little and delays/ignores the boundaries of the new school--which will/should have a direct effect on several high schools.
A confusing calendar with almost no five day weeks for the first months of school.

There's more.
Feel free to add her accomplishments and those of her well-paid staff.

It's silly to suggest that an entry-level person in any field should earn the same as a senior-level professional. They don't have the same experience or value to an organization.

That said, I think there are way too many administrators at FCPS and they could help the budget by cutting some of them. It's so bloated and they aren't actually helping improve our kids' education.

This argument doesn't make sense at all. Why would the starting salary of a teacher compare to a District Administrator who most likely has many more years of experience under their belt in addition to higher levels of responsibility and mostly likely education?

You can look up any FCPS employee's salary online - it is public knowledge and there are a large number of classroom teachers earning over $100K who are 10 year teachers or more.

I think $61,747/year starting salary for a 39-week contract with 3-6% raises each year is actually quite fair. If the payrate remained the same and teachers worked a 52-week year like most other salaried professionals, that starting salary would be over $82K.

Now, if you want to have a discussion about the amount of crap that teachers have to deal with from parents, students, and administrators, then that is another conversation with another set of solutions other than throwing more money at teachers to make all of the crap "worth it."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Fairfax County Public Schools pays its teachers a starting annual salary of $61,747 as it gives 44 of its district administrators over $200,000 per year. Meanwhile, student performance is abysmal, + teachers are paying for their own classroom supplies.


Is this fair and equitable?

I'd like to see a breakdown of what these people do.
How many work from home?

What do they do that has a direct effect on student achievement and progress.

How many work in Reid's communication factory?

cont.
What are the budgets of the organizations they lead?

Anonymous wrote: Fairfax County Public Schools pays its teachers a starting annual salary of $61,747 as it gives 44 of its district administrators over $200,000 per year. Meanwhile, student performance is abysmal, + teachers are paying for their own classroom supplies.


Is this fair and equitable?

I'd like to see a breakdown of what these people do.
How many work from home?

What do they do that has a direct effect on student achievement and progress.

How many work in Reid's communication factory?

Fairfax County Public Schools pays its teachers a starting annual salary of $61,747 as it gives 44 of its district administrators over $200,000 per year. Meanwhile, student performance is abysmal, + teachers are paying for their own classroom supplies.


Is this fair and equitable?