Anonymous wrote:I am a teacher and sad as it is, I would never encourage my son or daughter (if I had a daughter) to go into teaching. I'm a single parent and I barely scrape by on what I earn. I work a lot for what I earn and I am tired, tired, tired of having to prove that I am not crap everyday. That's how everyone I work with feels. It is a demoralizing profession and I would leave if I could. It certainly isn't a job for someone who is trying to support anyone other than themselves.
Anonymous wrote:
but I also make 3 times as much as a 20-year teacher. (And I certainly don't work three times as many hours.)
Did you start out making three times as much?
Anonymous wrote:
and pay well.
Great. Who is going to pay them?
but I also make 3 times as much as a 20-year teacher. (And I certainly don't work three times as many hours.)
There are 180 days in the school year. That is 36 5-day weeks. If you assume that teachers work an extra 20 non-instruction days per year at the school, (which seems high, but may be right) you are at 200 days. If they're working 10-hour days (again, probably a stretch), that's 2000 hours per year. That's a decent clip, especially when there are chunks of time (summer, breaks) when nothing gets done. I know that I work a lot more than that - but I also make 3 times as much as a 20-year teacher. (And I certainly don't work three times as many hours.)
and pay well.
Anonymous wrote:Chicken and the egg
1. do we not pay enough because a lot of teachers are mediocre or bad
2. it doesn't pay enough so qualified, good potential teachers don't go into the profession.
I think STEM teachers and those that are willing to teach in low income areas are paid a lot more. But, has the increase in pay attracted more and better teachers in these areas?
Anecdotally, below article would support #1 above:
http://nypost.com/2014/12/08/majority-of-citys-teacher-trainees-flunked-literacy-tests/
Anonymous wrote:Of course I realize it. But their salaries often reflect the work they put in. This is not the case in teaching. It's taken me 19 years (I took leave and was PT for years.) to make over $100K. That's ridiculous, and it's not typical of many other professions.
Teachers are not going to be paid the big bucks. They work for the government. Go to a ritzy private school. Chances are you would make less there.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:And, once again, teachers work very, very hard--for less than 39 weeks/year.
When I convert 10 months into weeks, I get at least 40 weeks.
Also, the teacher's salary is the teacher's salary -- unless the teacher supplements their income with a second job during winter, spring, and summer vacations. Yes, they get time off during winter, spring, and summer vacations. But time off doesn't pay the bills. The question isn't whether teachers get compensated what they deserve to get compensated, because few people gets compensated what they deserve to get compensated; that's not how compensation works. (If it were how compensation works, CEOs and lobbyists would be a whole lot less rich.) The question is whether the compensation is high enough to attract and retain highly-qualified people. What do you think is the answer to that question?
Anonymous wrote:Of course I realize it. But their salaries often reflect the work they put in. This is not the case in teaching. It's taken me 19 years (I took leave and was PT for years.) to make over $100K. That's ridiculous, and it's not typical of many other professions.
Teachers are not going to be paid the big bucks. They work for the government. Go to a ritzy private school. Chances are you would make less there.
Of course I realize it. But their salaries often reflect the work they put in. This is not the case in teaching. It's taken me 19 years (I took leave and was PT for years.) to make over $100K. That's ridiculous, and it's not typical of many other professions.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
When I convert 10 months into weeks, I get at least 40 weeks.
Also, the teacher's salary is the teacher's salary -- unless the teacher supplements their income with a second job during winter, spring, and summer vacations. Yes, they get time off during winter, spring, and summer vacations. But time off doesn't pay the bills. The question isn't whether teachers get compensated what they deserve to get compensated, because few people gets compensated what they deserve to get compensated; that's not how compensation works. (If it were how compensation works, CEOs and lobbyists would be a whole lot less rich.) The question is whether the compensation is high enough to attract and retain highly-qualified people. What do you think is the answer to that question?
Hope you are not a math teacher. Please count the days on your contract. You do know that most people do not get Christmas vacation, all federal holidays, and a Spring break?
We're not paid over the summer. I begin work the week before the kids return. We work through mid-June. That leaves 2 weeks of June, all of July, two weeks in August w/o a paycheck. For folks who have been in the system long enough, there's enough to save up for those summer weeks. For new teachers, it becomes difficult. So many take on summer jobs.
And tbh, the hours we work AFTER school ends and on weekends more than makes up for the "free" summers we have. I get home around 4 or after and work to at least 8 pm. On weekends, I plan and grade. not much of a life, especially if you have kids
But yes, my children see me. We only worry about before care (nanny share), and I spend holidays and snow days with them. So while I'm working, I'm around. I sacrifice so that I don't have to place my children in any institutionalized daycare, nor do I have to rely on camps to watch them all summer long.
How many parents can say they see their kids this much?
not many
So that's my "revenge" when folks like you try to demean us.
You do realize that many, many people, at the start of their careers, take on supplemental work, or have roommates, etc, to reduce expenses. And many, many people bring their work home, and don't get paid overtime.
It's not about demeaning; it's about the lack of understanding from teachers that they are doing no more than other people who are making a living. We all make sacrifices.
I think it's great (seriously), that you do what you do to see your kids more. That's my takeaway from this - that you planned well for your own children. I respect that.
Anonymous wrote:I don't think we should offer a higher starting salary. What we need is the potential to get a great salary if you excel. Almost EVERY type of job rewards based on merit. There is no reason why we can't do that with teachers. You have a formula...I'm pulling this out of the air, but
5 % test scores
10% teacher ratings
10% student ratings
10% principal observations and interactions with teacher
20% score on competency tests in your area of teaching. Are you truly smarter than a 4th grader? Great, take a test on all the areas 4th graders must master. If you are a math teacher, you take math tests.
10% senior colleague observations of your teacher
10% special education teachers rating you on how well you manage to create an inclusive environment
5% how often you volunteer to take on extra
5% former student and parent ratings of your teaching
and so forth....you get the point. Sure politics may affect some aspects, but it's not as black and white as some people make it out to be. You can find a way to merit pay and give bonuses.