| Author |
Message |
    
Teach66
| | Posted on Thursday, March 1, 2001 - 5:21 pm: |     |
Sounds like a bunch of teachers posting or somebody running for the BOE or TC!! |
Mtierney
| | Posted on Thursday, March 1, 2001 - 6:24 pm: | |
I never intimated that teachers should not receive fair wages.
I just thought that, as a profession, not an occupation, teachers were in the classroom because of a sincere desire to make a difference in a child's life.
Question: Why does Newark have to go outside the US to find teachers? Surely Newark receives millions of dollars from state and federal resources. They actually mislaid $25M a few weeks ago! I really haven't caught up on the rest of that story. |
Twig
| | Posted on Thursday, March 1, 2001 - 7:36 pm: | |
Forgive me, but....why in heck is it that no one even questions paying lawyers or stock brokers or corporate executives 200-600K per year? Who says they "deserve" that and why? What is so outlandish about assuming that teaching or social work is just as important as these other occupations? How did we get to the point where people whose career/life is dedicated to producing or handling money deserve such high salaries? How can doing that ever be more important than teaching kids?! Why do we expect teachers to be motivated and satisfied by fulfilling some "noble" inner purpose (and having a tough time making ends meet while doing so) but in other professions, the pursuit of more and more money is deemed to be perfectly acceptable if not laudable? And don't even get me started on Alex Rodriguez's baseball contract or what Jim Carey gets for being an idiot. Yeah, I know about the "what the marketplace bears" theories but sometimes it just doesn't make sense to me. Okay, I'll get off the soapbox now. (and no, I'm not a school teacher) |
Nakaille
| | Posted on Thursday, March 1, 2001 - 7:53 pm: | |
No forgiveness required, Twig. You're "right on the money" as they say.
Bacata |
Wendy
| | Posted on Thursday, March 1, 2001 - 9:57 pm: | |
I too am not a teacher. Nor am I running for the TC or the BOE. But for the same reason that we should pay our day care workers as much as we pay our car mechanics (or more) since our kids are more valuable than inanimate objects, so too we should pay teachers salaries commensurate with their incredibly important and challenging jobs. Why do so many people on this board who disagree need to ascribe self serving motives or cast aspersions ("are you nuts?")? Clearly, this is an interesting debate in and of itself. |
Jem
| | Posted on Thursday, March 1, 2001 - 11:01 pm: | |
Wendy,
The genesis of my admittedly flippant response to the suggestion that starting salaries for teachers be $100,000 is the simple fact that for over a month this bulletin board has been absolutely jammed with people complaining about taxes.
I think I also made it clear in my post, and if I didn't, let me do so now, that I value the work that teachers do. The profession should be regarded and remunerated more highly than it is now, but I'm sorry, it makes no sense in the public sector to set a starting salary at an unsustainable and frankly, unrealistic, level. I don't know what the top salary for a teacher is in this district, and it's probably not as high as it should be, but as I said before, a starting salary of $40,000 is not unattractive to a kid out of college, and it's higher than what we're now offering. Teachers with more experience, and those who enter teaching after having worked in other careers deserve substantially higher salaries.
I've said before that I regard taxes as the way that we pay for the services we want, and if we want high quality services, then we have to pay more, but there is a limit. We'd bump up against that limit mighty fast (without being able to pay for anything else) were salaries to hit the levels proposed in the posts to which I was reacting. Twig has made some really important points, and I agree that something is way out of whack in what we value. Seems to me that the argument becomes stronger that those who earn the most should bear a commensurate tax burden, but that suggestion is usually dismissed as "soak the rich," and that makes me wonder what it is we truly value. |
Wendy
| | Posted on Thursday, March 1, 2001 - 11:43 pm: | |
Jem, You raise valid points and thank you for the explanation of your prior remarks. I also don't think that salaries need to start at $100,000 and agree that something less for someone right out of college would still attract the better and more bright. My earlier point about looking at income taxes to pay for the larger salaries seems to correspond to your point about having the rich pay their fair share. |
Ffof
| | Posted on Friday, March 2, 2001 - 8:38 am: | |
As long as there is advertising, anyone who earns a living in the media's eye(movies, tv, sports) is going to make astronomically big bucks. Comparing that to teachers' pay is kind of apples to oranges. I agree teachers should be regarded with more respect which means higher salaries. But also remember that with summers off, a teacher getting paid $40,000 is equivalent to about $50,000 if you pro-rate it for the whole year. |
Nilmiester
| | Posted on Friday, March 2, 2001 - 9:18 am: | |
You don't have to start them at $100k per year but how about the goal to get there? The point that was missed is to the take the huge and NUTSY administrative costs and divert them to teachers resulting in no new tax increases. |
Mtierney
| | Posted on Friday, March 2, 2001 - 11:28 am: | |
Just to keep the topic going: What other occupation, profession, offers tenure?
Who can look toward 180 day work year?
Who else can be at home when their kids are? Have school vacations and days off? Have summers off?
Let's get real. These "benefits" do translate into earned income.
Now, tell me why teachers unions are opposed to merit wages?
Dedicated teachers who can and do go the extra mile in teaching our kids deserve monetary recognition. Also, the duds should find more lucrative work in the corporate world. |
Spw784
| | Posted on Friday, March 2, 2001 - 12:14 pm: | |
According to the 2000-2001 salary guide -
Step 1 - Bachelors degree only - $33,000
Step 11 - Bachelors + 60 credits (which is the same as Masters + 30) - $70,668 |
Jur050
| | Posted on Friday, March 2, 2001 - 1:12 pm: | |
Jem, You are wrong! Our most important asset is our children. They are our future!
As far as how best to accomplish valuing our teachers, by providing them with the rewards commensurate with their true importance, I suggest that this cannot be accomplished overnight. How to phase in higher pay for teachers is probably best done with the guidance of folks wiser than I. Or you for that matter!
It makes sense that if we, as a society, can develop a true understanding of the important role that needs to be addressed, ie. getting our priorities straight, that we can achieve greater success in the future. Our children are our link to the future!
Teachers are under paid, and many are not as good as others might be. Simple economics could and should be used to repair this fault! I open this topic up to the board for comment! What do you all think? |
Jur050
| | Posted on Friday, March 2, 2001 - 1:44 pm: | |
Jem, One more thing. If you think tax dollars need to be found, "you're nuts!" The government finds too many ways to spend our money already. A good example is that on the Federal level there is a surplus, some of which may be given back to its rightful owners shortly.
The liberal spending of our money on every "feel good" project, more than often, just because it makes sense that it should work, doesn't. Too often what starts out as a seemingly worthwhile use of money, becomes a nightmare. People become too dependant! The forces of greed and power, human conditions both, take over and grow out of control.
Government is big enough! Effective use of tax money, at least for me, means using common sense and simple economics. If you offer high salaries for those in any profession, and not fudge the results by promoting on the basis of anything other than measurable results, you will obtain effective results. Make sure to establish proper methods of confirming results though, don't leave the fox in charge of the hen house.
Nurses spend more time with patients. Doctors get the big bucks. Politics has become a lifetime profession for some. I think there is much change that needs to occur and it will! But, if we can realize simple proven methods, and apply them appropriately, where they obviously match correct priorities... oh well, I guess I'm dreaming again! |
Jur050
| | Posted on Friday, March 2, 2001 - 1:59 pm: | |
Mtierney, "What other occupation tenure-180 day work year." Look no further than the field of politics! |
Hobsonschoice
| | Posted on Friday, March 2, 2001 - 3:26 pm: | |
180 Days of Work
Two months off during the summer
Christmas...I mean Holiday Week Vacation
Winter Week of Vacation
Easter...I mean Spring Week of Vacation
8AM Start 3PM Stop
No Weekends, No Late nights (except the one IN THE CONTRACT) No voicemail, pagers, Faxes
Paid for 1/2 Day Training Sessions
All Federal Holidays Off
TEACHING A GREAT PART TIME JOB |
Lisat
| | Posted on Friday, March 2, 2001 - 4:31 pm: | |
Hobson,
You're right that teaching is a good part time job if it's treated that way. But a great teacher does a great deal more than punch a clock. Perhaps if the salaries were higher it would change the profession. And if the salaries were higher, more could reasonably be expected. All could be held to a higher standard. I think teaching should be viewed as a career not a job.
In the olden days, women were much more limited in their career choices, nurses, secretaries and teachers. My guess is that as more women became doctors, the more academically successful, more ambitious women who in the past might have become nurses instead became doctors, in general. I may be wrong but it seems logical. So, it may be true that these traditionally female fields aren't attracting the women that they would have in the past. (I also think that nursing and social work fields are still filled with intelligent women who are so compassionate that they wanted to be directly involved with patients/clients and so would have chosen to be a nurse over a doctor anyway.)
I know that in the businesses I've worked in, support areas of the companies (even if we're talking about the artists and writers creating the product being sold) were paid far less then the men (almost always men) in the company who were generating revenue -- sales, etc. And anyone raising children isn't calculated into the nation's GNP at all as if creating the generation we'll all rely on in the future is valueless. How do we change this in a capitalistic society? Is it working better in Europe where they seem more generous? I don't know. Does anyone out there?
There are quite a few teachers in my extended family. I know that at least one was making 90K when she retired. If I'm not mistaken she'll have a pension of 25% (I think). Does anyone know what the highest salary is for teachers?
Are universities and colleges approaching it in a different way? Is it more lucrative to be a professor? Is there merit pay? Are there unions? |
Manley
| | Posted on Friday, March 2, 2001 - 5:38 pm: | |
Hobsonschoice:
If you can teach math or science,I can find a school in New York for you on monday.Join the profession.
You will have five classes and a period for tuitoring.Remember the class size is 34 in the City.
Teach for a month,then tell me if it's a part time job.
If you do not want to travel,there will be plenty of openings in all districts in the next few years.Why are so many people retiring from part time jobs? |
Alidah
| | Posted on Friday, March 2, 2001 - 5:42 pm: | |
I have a friend who teaches in a community college system and she says it is nearly impossible to find a full time job. Teachers have to cobble together a bunch of part time positions in order to make enough to pay rent. Forget benefits-- and tenure is out of the questions.
Based on this, it seems like the K-12 teachers have a pretty good deal! |
Lisat
| | Posted on Friday, March 2, 2001 - 10:12 pm: | |
Manley,
Didn't the state entice many teachers to retire about 5 years ago? I know that they sweetened the pot for several of my relatives. An aunt and uncle retired in their late 50's and are now sailing around Florida and acting in community theater. If my uncle was half as wonderful in the classroom as he was at family get-togethers (he was an incredible tall tale teller) then there's one high school that lost a gem. Did someone think these teachers were overpaid? |
Silkcity
| | Posted on Friday, March 2, 2001 - 10:21 pm: | |
Oh my... I got on the board to ask the other teachers out there a kid-related question. Why now? Because on a Friday night his needs are keeping me awake, and I'm surfing the net looking for something to make his Monday better. He's a student in my class, one of many. I haven't yet met a teacher who's in this for the money. Most of us work 2nd jobs just to stay afloat, and we limit our families and our own kids' choices of college. I've been teaching ten years and my own student loans still aren't paid off. This "pretty good deal" is enormously challenging, and the challenges range from the intellectual (I'm teaching Homer, the Canterbury Tales, and All-of-a-Kind family this week), to the physical (it takes sheer willpower and a voice to do bus duty, organize table after table of kids into hot lunch lines, actively monitor they gym), to the technical (fix the copier, repair all computers, run the ditto machine and refill it with ink). There is no support staff for any teacher I know, and the phone calls to parents alone consume a hour daily -- not between the mythical 8 and 3. Where is that 8 -3 school? It's none I've ever visited? I've done other things and this I know: nothing prepares you to teach, but teaching prepares you for doing almost everything. It is a 24/7 job -- hey, kinda like parenting -- that means a lesson plan template installed in your brain. Even retired teachers can't see the Grand Canyon or bird's nest in the park without mentally building a lesson around it. I welcome any skeptics into my classroom. Reply here. I've got to go now; I was just instant messaged by a kid and parent. Oh, should that have ended at 3? |
Gerardryan
| | Posted on Saturday, March 3, 2001 - 2:05 am: | |
Hobson: obviously you've never shared a life with a real teacher.
Your loss.
I wouldn't trade you my HS chemistry teacher for all the money I've earned from his inspiration... and while his salary may have s***ed, to me Larry Musanti's close to a god. Price that out for me, please, so that I can mail him the checks.
of course I freely admit to a bias here. On the one hand, there's my mom, dad, 3 uncles, one sister-in-law, two sisters, me (on occasion) and one wife
on the other hand?
everything |
Deadwhitemale
| | Posted on Sunday, March 4, 2001 - 10:06 am: | |
LisaT: merit pay for meritorious teachers?
What about: no tenure, like in the real world, where those high paid professionals can lose their job if they fail to discharge their responsibilities in an effective way?
Does this district have any method for evaluating teacher competence?
Anyone out there have any ideas?
DWM |
Nakaille
| | Posted on Sunday, March 4, 2001 - 11:26 am: | |
One problem we always run into with evaluating teacher performance is the question of the "product." What is the product, and how does the extremely variable "raw material" (ie. students) get accounted for in that evaluation? For example, if a kid gets in serious trouble at home just before taking a standardized test (otherwise known as having a bad day), is it likely to affect test performance and should that reflect on the teacher?
What are reliable and consistent measures of teacher performance? Is student performance on standardized tests the best measure of teacher performance? (I think not but that's only one opinion.)
I'm not arguing against evaluating teacher competence. It's very important not only for the education of our kids but also for teachers to be able to improve their skills, especially in areas outside their specific interests (where they are likely to engage in continuous learning anyway.)
I just underwent my annual performance review at work. I am a social worker so some of my work may be likened to teaching in that my efforts are directed, in part, at changing client behavior. The review consisted not only of specific skills and competencies (mine, not my clients') but also goals we had set last year for improvements and for special projects. It did not attempt to measure the clients' progress or functioning, since that would not be a fair measure of MY efforts, only theirs.
But do objective tools exist for evaluating teachers that are independent of student variables?
For those in client-based services, what measures (outside of REVENUE, which is obviously not applicable) are used to evaluate your performance? Do you think these might be applicable to the teaching profession?
Bacata |
Deadwhitemale
| | Posted on Sunday, March 4, 2001 - 5:10 pm: | |
The Board could set a goal of district scores on HSPT and ESPA placing us UPWARDS to the middle of the next lower(!) DFG; two summers ago the Board voted down a proposal by two of its own members to have the goal of moving these scores upward to within the middle of our own DFG within 3 years.
Horoschak was not in favor of such verifiable goals.
So, without goals, our teachers have no neutral, verifiable benchmarks, our student scores languish, our reputation tanks, and taxes soar nonetheless.
DWM |
Cody
| | Posted on Sunday, March 4, 2001 - 5:55 pm: | |
We all need to remember that teachers cannot control what happens at home. They cannot insure that all parents reinforce concepts that are introduced at school, review them, value learning for learning's sake. They cannot force parents to have books/magazines available for children to read and to encourage them to read. They cannot force parents to discuss current events, to listen to news broadcasts or to have newspapers in the homes. Teachers have children only 7 hours a day. Some parents feel homework should not be assigned because it cuts into "quality family time" - but is that time always used in meaningful ways? Are parents tying concepts introduced to class to real world experiences that they share with their children? That's a big factor in making education meaningful to all children. In a professional or corporate environment, people have more control of the product they produce than do teachers. It seems that many children do not complete home assignments - so what does the teacher do then? How much additional teaching can be done in school to supplement for some students without boring the others? I think a lot of it comes down to parenting and the need for all parents to make the time to show their children how important parents feel school is and how valuable the lessons the children are learning are, now and for their futures. But teachers cannot do this on their own. So how do you control such variables? Any ideas? |
Manley
| | Posted on Sunday, March 4, 2001 - 6:23 pm: | |
The Superintendent is directed to develop for adoption before the next budget cycle a plan to raise demonstrably the district's average ESPA,GEPA,HSPA,and SAT scores over three years.The plan must contain measurable targets for each test that is statistically significant and represent continuous progress on a school-by-school basis.With regard to this plan, the following should be understood:
The Superintendent is not constrained by current practices,procedures or policies in the accomplishment of the plan.
Learning environment, quality of instruction and quality of curricula may not be sacrificed to accomplish the targets.
With respect to the SAT, the current practice of encouraging the widest possible student participation must continue.
It may be necessary to present various cost options, all which must be economically viable. |
Uqbar
| | Posted on Sunday, March 4, 2001 - 6:47 pm: | |
Why doesn't the school engage one of those SAT prep companies on a regular basis for students? Half the test is about how to take a test, rather than about actual knowledge.
Teachers should focus on their subjects, which is what they know. Prep companies focus on the test, which is what they know. This ain't brain surgery (or maybe it is). |
Alidah
| | Posted on Sunday, March 4, 2001 - 7:44 pm: | |
Cody: Maybe the PTAs of various schools could make it a goal to reach out to the parents who need guidance in the areas you're talking about.
An Essex county school system (I think) hosted a gathering where they offered goodies and giveaways to lure the caregivers to the event.
Some caregivers believe that all of the things you mention are the responsibility of the school and not the caregiver. That is the conception that needs to be changed. |
Jem
| | Posted on Sunday, March 4, 2001 - 8:00 pm: | |
Uqbar, The district actually has already implemented what you suggest, and in more than one incarnation. Starting with last year's junior class, the high school was able to get a special rate from Kaplan (SAT prep), and multiple group sessions were run at a cost per student (paid by individual families) somewhat below "retail" cost. I believe this continues. Besides that, Deborah Prinz (whose position is not funded for next year unless grant money can be found) began an SAT tutoring program through ACHIEVE. She had people from Kaplan train local volunteers who then prep high school students at no cost.
It could be coincidence, but our average SAT scores (the ones reported for last year's junior class, I believe) have risen over those of the previous year. |
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page