Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, it is unpopular to consider salaries without considering cost of living. Unpopular because it's dumb and/or disingenuous.

OP here. cost of living is not a factor here because I am comparing to people living in the same area. I make similar salaries as teacher in DC and I actually live in DC. I have 3 weeks of vacation and no pension. But I am expected to hand gift cards to teachers 3-4 times a year, plus volunteer for all kind of events, donate to the PTO and help with all kind of classroom requests.

Don’t get me wrong, I think teachers deserve their salaries but all the extra parents are expected to do is a bit over the top!

Anonymous wrote:I have been a high school counselor in both dcps and mcps. In 16 years i have never had one single student who was interested in becoming a teacher.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To all the teachers, thank you for what you do. There are many unique aspects of teaching as a profession, including how much impact a single teacher can have on a number of lives and how exhausting it is to have to be "on" without breaks for long periods.

Without a doubt, there are places in the US where teachers are paid low salaries. The salaries in this area tend to be decent and in line with other similarly educated professionals who work for government employers (at the state and local levels). As a parent (and child of two teachers), I find discussions about salary to be frustrating because everyone talks around each other, raising considerations and arguments that are either irrelevant or inconsistent.

The first reality, regardless of actual salaries or the challenge of the profession, is that public school teachers are public employees. Therefore, you can't compare their salaries or working conditions to the private sector. As a rule, state and local government employees make less than others in the private sector. In this region, if you compare teacher salaries to those of other government employees, the salaries are not out of line.

The second reality is that teachers get paid for 10 months, for better or worse. Teachers are always saying, "We don't have summers off - we only get paid for 10 months." Absolutely true, but then you can't really compare a 10-month salary to the 12-month salary of other professions to claim that teachers are underpaid. Having worked in state government, I can attest that 10-month teacher salaries are very similar to the 12-month salaries of similarly educated government employees. If you get paid for 10 months and have more time off during those 10 months than many people have in a full twelve months, that's a benefit. It's also a benefit to have a block of time away from work (whether it's 8 or 6 weeks), even if it's unpaid. Few professionals, even those with generous leave, have the opportunity to take off for more than a month at a time.

Then there's the, "we don't really have off during the summer, we are forced to do unpaid training the whole summer." I don't know. I know many teachers (including some in my family), and none of them work all summer doing training. They go on vacation, hang out every day at the pool, and do other leisure activities that they have every right to enjoy during this unpaid time away from their professions. Again, that's an aspect of the profession that most professionals, even those with generous leave, don't have access to. On top of that, if you are a parent, in addition to summer, there are other long breaks (winter and spring) where teachers don't have to pay for childcare, unlike other professionals. I'm not saying that these breaks aren't necessary, given the "always on" aspect of teaching, but they are extended breaks at convenient times (holidays, summers).

Of course, in addition to the "we don't really have time off in the summer" teachers, there are the "we have to work full-time over the summer to make ends meet. These are inconsistent. I've never met a teacher who simultaneously works full-time and trains full-time (without any pay) for all the weeks of the summer.

I think that parents get frustrated when some benefits of teaching, including the nature of the time off and pensions, are not acknowledged or flat-out denied. It's difficult for families who don't have extensive outside help to fulfill professional demands while structuring their lives around the school calendar, with its many breaks and random days off. Denying that teaching has some unique benefits doesn't elicit support and understanding of the challenges teachers face.

And yet teachers are still fleeing. That’s what I don’t understand about this thread and the many like it. Non-teachers are quick to point out what they see as the benefits of teaching, and then teachers respond by saying the drawbacks far outweigh these benefits. Your post suggests we should accept your vision of our profession, but I don’t see your acceptance of ours.

And teachers continue fleeing. Hearing from non-teachers that we should be grateful for unpaid summers doesn’t help us. We are overworked and yes, underpaid. If the summers were the huge perk non-teachers think they are, we wouldn’t be spending our planning periods covering vacancies.

Anonymous wrote:To all the teachers, thank you for what you do. There are many unique aspects of teaching as a profession, including how much impact a single teacher can have on a number of lives and how exhausting it is to have to be "on" without breaks for long periods.

Without a doubt, there are places in the US where teachers are paid low salaries. The salaries in this area tend to be decent and in line with other similarly educated professionals who work for government employers (at the state and local levels). As a parent (and child of two teachers), I find discussions about salary to be frustrating because everyone talks around each other, raising considerations and arguments that are either irrelevant or inconsistent.

The first reality, regardless of actual salaries or the challenge of the profession, is that public school teachers are public employees. Therefore, you can't compare their salaries or working conditions to the private sector. As a rule, state and local government employees make less than others in the private sector. In this region, if you compare teacher salaries to those of other government employees, the salaries are not out of line.

The second reality is that teachers get paid for 10 months, for better or worse. Teachers are always saying, "We don't have summers off - we only get paid for 10 months." Absolutely true, but then you can't really compare a 10-month salary to the 12-month salary of other professions to claim that teachers are underpaid. Having worked in state government, I can attest that 10-month teacher salaries are very similar to the 12-month salaries of similarly educated government employees. If you get paid for 10 months and have more time off during those 10 months than many people have in a full twelve months, that's a benefit. It's also a benefit to have a block of time away from work (whether it's 8 or 6 weeks), even if it's unpaid. Few professionals, even those with generous leave, have the opportunity to take off for more than a month at a time.

Then there's the, "we don't really have off during the summer, we are forced to do unpaid training the whole summer." I don't know. I know many teachers (including some in my family), and none of them work all summer doing training. They go on vacation, hang out every day at the pool, and do other leisure activities that they have every right to enjoy during this unpaid time away from their professions. Again, that's an aspect of the profession that most professionals, even those with generous leave, don't have access to. On top of that, if you are a parent, in addition to summer, there are other long breaks (winter and spring) where teachers don't have to pay for childcare, unlike other professionals. I'm not saying that these breaks aren't necessary, given the "always on" aspect of teaching, but they are extended breaks at convenient times (holidays, summers).

Of course, in addition to the "we don't really have time off in the summer" teachers, there are the "we have to work full-time over the summer to make ends meet. These are inconsistent. I've never met a teacher who simultaneously works full-time and trains full-time (without any pay) for all the weeks of the summer.

I think that parents get frustrated when some benefits of teaching, including the nature of the time off and pensions, are not acknowledged or flat-out denied. It's difficult for families who don't have extensive outside help to fulfill professional demands while structuring their lives around the school calendar, with its many breaks and random days off. Denying that teaching has some unique benefits doesn't elicit support and understanding of the challenges teachers face.

Anonymous wrote:To all the teachers, thank you for what you do. There are many unique aspects of teaching as a profession, including how much impact a single teacher can have on a number of lives and how exhausting it is to have to be "on" without breaks for long periods.

Without a doubt, there are places in the US where teachers are paid low salaries. The salaries in this area tend to be decent and in line with other similarly educated professionals who work for government employers (at the state and local levels). As a parent (and child of two teachers), I find discussions about salary to be frustrating because everyone talks around each other, raising considerations and arguments that are either irrelevant or inconsistent.

The first reality, regardless of actual salaries or the challenge of the profession, is that public school teachers are public employees. Therefore, you can't compare their salaries or working conditions to the private sector. As a rule, state and local government employees make less than others in the private sector. In this region, if you compare teacher salaries to those of other government employees, the salaries are not out of line.

The second reality is that teachers get paid for 10 months, for better or worse. Teachers are always saying, "We don't have summers off - we only get paid for 10 months." Absolutely true, but then you can't really compare a 10-month salary to the 12-month salary of other professions to claim that teachers are underpaid. Having worked in state government, I can attest that 10-month teacher salaries are very similar to the 12-month salaries of similarly educated government employees. If you get paid for 10 months and have more time off during those 10 months than many people have in a full twelve months, that's a benefit. It's also a benefit to have a block of time away from work (whether it's 8 or 6 weeks), even if it's unpaid. Few professionals, even those with generous leave, have the opportunity to take off for more than a month at a time.

Then there's the, "we don't really have off during the summer, we are forced to do unpaid training the whole summer." I don't know. I know many teachers (including some in my family), and none of them work all summer doing training. They go on vacation, hang out every day at the pool, and do other leisure activities that they have every right to enjoy during this unpaid time away from their professions. Again, that's an aspect of the profession that most professionals, even those with generous leave, don't have access to. On top of that, if you are a parent, in addition to summer, there are other long breaks (winter and spring) where teachers don't have to pay for childcare, unlike other professionals. I'm not saying that these breaks aren't necessary, given the "always on" aspect of teaching, but they are extended breaks at convenient times (holidays, summers).

Of course, in addition to the "we don't really have time off in the summer" teachers, there are the "we have to work full-time over the summer to make ends meet. These are inconsistent. I've never met a teacher who simultaneously works full-time and trains full-time (without any pay) for all the weeks of the summer.

I think that parents get frustrated when some benefits of teaching, including the nature of the time off and pensions, are not acknowledged or flat-out denied. It's difficult for families who don't have extensive outside help to fulfill professional demands while structuring their lives around the school calendar, with its many breaks and random days off. Denying that teaching has some unique benefits doesn't elicit support and understanding of the challenges teachers face.

Anonymous wrote:There's a long history of teachers being grossly underpaid in the US, and so there has rightly been a long history of being grateful to teachers not just for their impact, but slso for their sacrifice. And, accordingly, there is a culture of thanking them -- gifts at holiday time, gifts at the end of the year, Teacher Appreciation Week - and generally appreciating the special sacrifice they make on behalf of the kids.

Teachers, especially in DC, are now more fairly paid. We still appreciate them! And they still make sacrifices of time and energy, but they no longer make a particularly large financial sacrifice compared to many other jobs.

The identity of teachers as underpaid has been slower to change than the reality. That's what I understand OP to be saying. It's a transition.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just read this in David Graeber's "Bullshit Jobs" that may explain some of the vibes here.

he's talking in this section about how capitalism has created this "principle of inverse relation of compensation and social benefit" --- basically, the larger the social benefit and contribution of your job, the less money you are allowed to demand. Very twisted, IMO.

"teachers perform a vitally necessary function, yet have the temerity to demand middle-class lifestyles. They are the objects of a special ire, I suspect, by those trapped in soul-desroying low- and middle-level bullshit jobs."

Is this surprising, given that many of those soul-destroying jobs are lower paid than teaching, and also do not come with two months off during the summer and other breaks throughout the year? And then to hear teachers making $130k say that's not enough and act like they're working harder than anyone else?

I don’t know a single teacher making anywhere remotely near $130K (or even over $100K). Can we stop using the extreme top of a pay scale that most people NEVER see as an “average” salary? It’s disingenuous.

There's literally a poster on this thread who said they make $130k in DCPS, and the subject of the post is "DCPS teachers are well paid," so it seems reasonable to mention. Obviously they're not all making that much. But some are.

So, one poster here. Okay. If you’ve read the thread, it has been well established —over and over again — how rare this salary is, even in DCPS (the highest paid region).

I suppose I should judge every profession by its highest paid representative? So every lawyer makes 7 figures? Every one!

Exactly. A first year DCPS teacher makes $57k or $61 if they have a masters. Not exactly living on champagne and caviar in DC on that salary. You'd be lucky to afford an apartment without roommates.

Once again, this is not unique. I'm a fed and our agency hires new grads with masters at GS-7 or GS-9, so in the same range. OH, and only 3 weeks vacation total for each of the first three years (no summer, winter, and spring break)!

A first year teacher makes $63,373 or $67,598 with a masters under the new (now expired) contract. It is not living on champagne and caviar. It's a decent start compared to some other professions but it's also below many others. Even if one considers the salary appropriate, it may not be enough to compete with other starting jobs that allow you to work remote or hybrid, not constantly be on stage and not have to address the demands and needs of numerous stakeholders every minute of every day.

So it might not be enough to attract candidates who don't actually want to be teachers? Okay.

I'm a librarian and those salaries would be extremely competitive in my field for someone entry level (and librarian positions increasingly require a master's even to be considered). Librarians are not as "on stage" as teachers are, even in public facing reference positions or children's library roles. There are rote and hybrid library jobs, especially in the private sector or roles where all or most materials are online. There are lots of stakeholders in a library job, though they are probably not as demanding as those teachers deal with.

Library jobs in DC average much higher pay than in other parts of the country because of some idiosyncrasies of the market (Library of Congress, various federal agency libraries, plus a lot of private libraries at law firms and associations) but it would still be hard to find entry level positions here paying as well as DCPS teachers can make right out if school.

Just some perspective. Maybe some of the disgruntled teachers should switch to library work. Though you'll probably need to get an MLS.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just read this in David Graeber's "Bullshit Jobs" that may explain some of the vibes here.

he's talking in this section about how capitalism has created this "principle of inverse relation of compensation and social benefit" --- basically, the larger the social benefit and contribution of your job, the less money you are allowed to demand. Very twisted, IMO.

"teachers perform a vitally necessary function, yet have the temerity to demand middle-class lifestyles. They are the objects of a special ire, I suspect, by those trapped in soul-desroying low- and middle-level bullshit jobs."

Is this surprising, given that many of those soul-destroying jobs are lower paid than teaching, and also do not come with two months off during the summer and other breaks throughout the year? And then to hear teachers making $130k say that's not enough and act like they're working harder than anyone else?

I don’t know a single teacher making anywhere remotely near $130K (or even over $100K). Can we stop using the extreme top of a pay scale that most people NEVER see as an “average” salary? It’s disingenuous.

This thread dis not about teachers "anywhere." It's about teachers in DCPS, who make more than teachers elsewhere. It's very frustrating that teachers from other jurisdictions keep coming into the thread and getting mad and saying "but I am not well paid!" Yes, well, we aren't talking about you. As a profession, teachers absolutely ARE underpaid. Teachers in red states often make what are essentially poverty wages because of underinvestment in education. It's a real problem.

But teachers in DCPS are among the highest paid in the country. And yes, some of that pay is due to bonuses for being "highly effective" and that's not guaranteed, but some teachers absolutely avail themselves of it and yes there are teachers who meet the requirement.

ECE teachers in DCPS are particularly well paid. If you have a master degree in early childhood education, you can make over 100k within 10 years of teaching. That's amazing. Go talk to preschool and kindergarten teachers in other areas and ask how that sounds to them. DCPS has invested heavily in its ECE programs and that shows up in an incredibly strong ECE offering throughout the system, even at schools that really struggle with the upper grades, and some phenomenally good ECE instruction. This is not a criticism, it's actually evidence of what can happen if you are willing to financially reward top performers.

Anyway, this thread is not about the average teaching salary. It's not even about the average teaching salary in DCPS, because averaging everyone's salaries across the whole system would be incredibly misleading, given how much pay can vary depending on credentials, impact, and tenure. The thread is about the fact (and it is a fact) that DCPS actually pays teachers pretty well. That doesn't mean teaching in DCPS is easy, that the district is well run, or even that DCPS teachers don't deserve more in an absolute sense based on the vital service they perform.

And yet….those teachers don’t all come here.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just read this in David Graeber's "Bullshit Jobs" that may explain some of the vibes here.

he's talking in this section about how capitalism has created this "principle of inverse relation of compensation and social benefit" --- basically, the larger the social benefit and contribution of your job, the less money you are allowed to demand. Very twisted, IMO.

"teachers perform a vitally necessary function, yet have the temerity to demand middle-class lifestyles. They are the objects of a special ire, I suspect, by those trapped in soul-desroying low- and middle-level bullshit jobs."

Is this surprising, given that many of those soul-destroying jobs are lower paid than teaching, and also do not come with two months off during the summer and other breaks throughout the year? And then to hear teachers making $130k say that's not enough and act like they're working harder than anyone else?

I don’t know a single teacher making anywhere remotely near $130K (or even over $100K). Can we stop using the extreme top of a pay scale that most people NEVER see as an “average” salary? It’s disingenuous.

This thread dis not about teachers "anywhere." It's about teachers in DCPS, who make more than teachers elsewhere. It's very frustrating that teachers from other jurisdictions keep coming into the thread and getting mad and saying "but I am not well paid!" Yes, well, we aren't talking about you. As a profession, teachers absolutely ARE underpaid. Teachers in red states often make what are essentially poverty wages because of underinvestment in education. It's a real problem.

But teachers in DCPS are among the highest paid in the country. And yes, some of that pay is due to bonuses for being "highly effective" and that's not guaranteed, but some teachers absolutely avail themselves of it and yes there are teachers who meet the requirement.

ECE teachers in DCPS are particularly well paid. If you have a master degree in early childhood education, you can make over 100k within 10 years of teaching. That's amazing. Go talk to preschool and kindergarten teachers in other areas and ask how that sounds to them. DCPS has invested heavily in its ECE programs and that shows up in an incredibly strong ECE offering throughout the system, even at schools that really struggle with the upper grades, and some phenomenally good ECE instruction. This is not a criticism, it's actually evidence of what can happen if you are willing to financially reward top performers.

Anyway, this thread is not about the average teaching salary. It's not even about the average teaching salary in DCPS, because averaging everyone's salaries across the whole system would be incredibly misleading, given how much pay can vary depending on credentials, impact, and tenure. The thread is about the fact (and it is a fact) that DCPS actually pays teachers pretty well. That doesn't mean teaching in DCPS is easy, that the district is well run, or even that DCPS teachers don't deserve more in an absolute sense based on the vital service they perform.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just read this in David Graeber's "Bullshit Jobs" that may explain some of the vibes here.

he's talking in this section about how capitalism has created this "principle of inverse relation of compensation and social benefit" --- basically, the larger the social benefit and contribution of your job, the less money you are allowed to demand. Very twisted, IMO.

"teachers perform a vitally necessary function, yet have the temerity to demand middle-class lifestyles. They are the objects of a special ire, I suspect, by those trapped in soul-desroying low- and middle-level bullshit jobs."

Is this surprising, given that many of those soul-destroying jobs are lower paid than teaching, and also do not come with two months off during the summer and other breaks throughout the year? And then to hear teachers making $130k say that's not enough and act like they're working harder than anyone else?

I don’t know a single teacher making anywhere remotely near $130K (or even over $100K). Can we stop using the extreme top of a pay scale that most people NEVER see as an “average” salary? It’s disingenuous.

There's literally a poster on this thread who said they make $130k in DCPS, and the subject of the post is "DCPS teachers are well paid," so it seems reasonable to mention. Obviously they're not all making that much. But some are.

So, one poster here. Okay. If you’ve read the thread, it has been well established —over and over again — how rare this salary is, even in DCPS (the highest paid region).

I suppose I should judge every profession by its highest paid representative? So every lawyer makes 7 figures? Every one!

Exactly. A first year DCPS teacher makes $57k or $61 if they have a masters. Not exactly living on champagne and caviar in DC on that salary. You'd be lucky to afford an apartment without roommates.

Once again, this is not unique. I'm a fed and our agency hires new grads with masters at GS-7 or GS-9, so in the same range. OH, and only 3 weeks vacation total for each of the first three years (no summer, winter, and spring break)!

A first year teacher makes $63,373 or $67,598 with a masters under the new (now expired) contract. It is not living on champagne and caviar. It's a decent start compared to some other professions but it's also below many others. Even if one considers the salary appropriate, it may not be enough to compete with other starting jobs that allow you to work remote or hybrid, not constantly be on stage and not have to address the demands and needs of numerous stakeholders every minute of every day.

So it might not be enough to attract candidates who don't actually want to be teachers? Okay.

I'm a librarian and those salaries would be extremely competitive in my field for someone entry level (and librarian positions increasingly require a master's even to be considered). Librarians are not as "on stage" as teachers are, even in public facing reference positions or children's library roles. There are rote and hybrid library jobs, especially in the private sector or roles where all or most materials are online. There are lots of stakeholders in a library job, though they are probably not as demanding as those teachers deal with.

Library jobs in DC average much higher pay than in other parts of the country because of some idiosyncrasies of the market (Library of Congress, various federal agency libraries, plus a lot of private libraries at law firms and associations) but it would still be hard to find entry level positions here paying as well as DCPS teachers can make right out if school.

Just some perspective. Maybe some of the disgruntled teachers should switch to library work. Though you'll probably need to get an MLS.