Anonymous wrote:Also, I taught in rough schools--but it's not the same as a war zone.

You get a pension in the military with 20 years in regardless where you've spent your time. Many in the military aren't in a warzone - ever.

Also, I taught in rough schools--but it's not the same as a war zone.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They do better than college professors. My university's retirement package is not nearly as generous. Many college professors work into their seventies for this reason.

Also, let's just dispense with the myth that every kindergarten teacher is actually a potential CEO, nuclear physicist, brain surgeon, etc. It's just not true. That's like saying that everyone who joins the postal service is doing us a huge favor since otherwise he would have gone to Harvard and majored in computer engineering. Enough is enough already. If someone is earning less as a teacher, it doesn't necessarily follow that they could have earned more as something else.

The way things are now, yes I agree with you, and I think what you've touched on is a big part of the problem. We are not attracting the best and brightest to the field. How can we expect our children to excel if the people educating them are unmotivated, overworked, and have only a cursory understanding of the subjects they teach? This is not to say that there are not brilliant teachers out there, but they are the exception instead of the rule. Most brilliant people have more choices, and most will choose more lucrative and more appreciated fields.

Yes. Not everyone has the potential to be a rocket scientist.

We don't necessarily need brilliant, and there are very, very few brilliant people. I am close enough to that -- PhD from a top-ten program; elite undergrad; excellent job in my field... I started out as a teacher before returning to school. Not through Teach For America, but I was the kind of person TFA thinks is the solution (I am older than that program). I was good in the classroom, but certainly not "brilliant" at it. I got worn down by the constant barrage of criticism and the unrealistic demands. I got worn down by being in a school with few resources. I had a fairly deep understanding of my subject and was not unmotivated. What I didn't have was the ability to work in a loud chaotic environment, or great intuition about what is going on in the adolescent head. What we need is someone with the right skills and talents placed in a supportive environment to do their job.

Thank you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know this is the current meme.

When I look at my friend, who will retire in a few years and get almost her entire salary and benefits in retirement for years and years beyond, I don't see her as underpaid. Neither does she.

Do people forget about this perk when saying teachers are underpaid?

That benefit isn't what it was years ago.

This. As a teacher entering my "prime" years, I am very discouraged by the fact that colleagues of mine who do very little other than "what they've always done" earn twice my salary and have a retirement plan that far surpasses mine. (Yes, I am all for merit-based pay. If only...)

When considering the idea of the overpaid teacher, please look at the salary of those in the middle -- those who have been teaching long enough to have the benefit of experience but are enthusiastic and continuously developing our practice based on current research and our ever-changing world -- before passing judgment. I didn't go into teaching for the money, but I also didn't expect the disparity that currently exists due to a pay scale that only reflects years of experience.

Depends on where you teach. List of best places to be a teacher, which looks mostly at COL + salary.

http://qz.com/305109/the-best-places-to-be-a-teacher-in-the-us/

I would love to go back to teaching, but it just doesn't pay well enough. I earn 3 times as much in the field I now work in. And as PP notes, I'm sure if I did go back, I wouldn't get that great pension.

Speaking from someone who has a high hourly rate + I used to be a teacher, yes they are underpaid. They are county employees, however and like all county employees (or govt. employees or any other employees who receive a pension), it is a GREAT perquisite. Consider someone in the military who retires after 20 years in, gets full retirement benefits and goes on to have another job with a high salary for the next 20+ years. That doesn't equate to meaning that teachers aren't underpaid when they are teaching. They are.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know this is the current meme.

When I look at my friend, who will retire in a few years and get almost her entire salary and benefits in retirement for years and years beyond, I don't see her as underpaid. Neither does she.

Do people forget about this perk when saying teachers are underpaid?

That benefit isn't what it was years ago.

Teachers who are starting out now will not get these benefits. I started in 2000 and I will not get this either.

That benefit isn't what it was years ago.

And, the pay is significantly better.

Anonymous wrote:I know this is the current meme.

When I look at my friend, who will retire in a few years and get almost her entire salary and benefits in retirement for years and years beyond, I don't see her as underpaid. Neither does she.

Do people forget about this perk when saying teachers are underpaid?

That benefit isn't what it was years ago.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They do better than college professors. My university's retirement package is not nearly as generous. Many college professors work into their seventies for this reason.

Also, let's just dispense with the myth that every kindergarten teacher is actually a potential CEO, nuclear physicist, brain surgeon, etc. It's just not true. That's like saying that everyone who joins the postal service is doing us a huge favor since otherwise he would have gone to Harvard and majored in computer engineering. Enough is enough already. If someone is earning less as a teacher, it doesn't necessarily follow that they could have earned more as something else.

The way things are now, yes I agree with you, and I think what you've touched on is a big part of the problem. We are not attracting the best and brightest to the field. How can we expect our children to excel if the people educating them are unmotivated, overworked, and have only a cursory understanding of the subjects they teach? This is not to say that there are not brilliant teachers out there, but they are the exception instead of the rule. Most brilliant people have more choices, and most will choose more lucrative and more appreciated fields.

Yes. Not everyone has the potential to be a rocket scientist.

We don't necessarily need brilliant, and there are very, very few brilliant people. I am close enough to that -- PhD from a top-ten program; elite undergrad; excellent job in my field... I started out as a teacher before returning to school. Not through Teach For America, but I was the kind of person TFA thinks is the solution (I am older than that program). I was good in the classroom, but certainly not "brilliant" at it. I got worn down by the constant barrage of criticism and the unrealistic demands. I got worn down by being in a school with few resources. I had a fairly deep understanding of my subject and was not unmotivated. What I didn't have was the ability to work in a loud chaotic environment, or great intuition about what is going on in the adolescent head. What we need is someone with the right skills and talents placed in a supportive environment to do their job.

Anonymous wrote:They do better than college professors. My university's retirement package is not nearly as generous. Many college professors work into their seventies for this reason.

Also, let's just dispense with the myth that every kindergarten teacher is actually a potential CEO, nuclear physicist, brain surgeon, etc. It's just not true. That's like saying that everyone who joins the postal service is doing us a huge favor since otherwise he would have gone to Harvard and majored in computer engineering. Enough is enough already. If someone is earning less as a teacher, it doesn't necessarily follow that they could have earned more as something else.

The way things are now, yes I agree with you, and I think what you've touched on is a big part of the problem. We are not attracting the best and brightest to the field. How can we expect our children to excel if the people educating them are unmotivated, overworked, and have only a cursory understanding of the subjects they teach? This is not to say that there are not brilliant teachers out there, but they are the exception instead of the rule. Most brilliant people have more choices, and most will choose more lucrative and more appreciated fields.

They do better than college professors. My university's retirement package is not nearly as generous. Many college professors work into their seventies for this reason.

Also, let's just dispense with the myth that every kindergarten teacher is actually a potential CEO, nuclear physicist, brain surgeon, etc. It's just not true. That's like saying that everyone who joins the postal service is doing us a huge favor since otherwise he would have gone to Harvard and majored in computer engineering. Enough is enough already. If someone is earning less as a teacher, it doesn't necessarily follow that they could have earned more as something else.

Anonymous wrote:I know this is the current meme.

When I look at my friend, who will retire in a few years and get almost her entire salary and benefits in retirement for years and years beyond, I don't see her as underpaid. Neither does she.

Do people forget about this perk when saying teachers are underpaid?

When a high achiever decides to go into teaching, do people say, "Oh, of course!"? When a smart kid decides in college that they want to grow up and make a lot of money, do they become a teacher?

I know this is the current meme.

When I look at my friend, who will retire in a few years and get almost her entire salary and benefits in retirement for years and years beyond, I don't see her as underpaid. Neither does she.

Do people forget about this perk when saying teachers are underpaid?