Welcome to the TTP community
Be apart of something great, join today!
Teachers: Do they deserve more money?
- Thread starter Dial 9-1-1
- Start date
Well, it has been a long while since I posted, but this is some pretty good reading. Even more surprising is the quality of insights beyond the traditional "over-paid"...yada yada yada.
The topic is huge, but I will throw in some general ramblings (far more diplomatically than in my earlier TTP days) to appease Regs.
There is never an easy answer to the teacher wages debate. Indeed, like most publice service jobs, value can be difficult to determine. Of course, in Medicine, if a patient needs emergency surgery... the value is clear. Then there is private specialization practice and the need/demand for breast enlargement. The paying public needs these things and will pay dearly, just as they will pay $$$ to watch movies or sporting events (but that is probably another thread).
How do you measure the value of public education, and that of individual teachers? It is not as simple as FSA scores and provincial exam results. How do rate the value of the person who instills the passion to become a doctor, lawyer, plumber, actor, athlete, or even, yes, a teacher? The importance of teachers in children's lives cannot be glossed over, or easily dismissed. Moreover, the argument of the "bad-teacher" or "lazy-teacher" seems to get far too much air time. Are there bad teachers out there, sure. Just as you have bad doctors, bad lawyers, bad plumbers, bad actors.... and so on. I can remember some less than stellar ones from my youth as well, but I remember more good ones. Then there are the great ones. Their impact is beyond measure. They challenge, inspire, empathize and console... and they don't do it for $$$. It is just part of who they are. So, instead of discussing teachers wages in relation to the "bad ones", perhaps you should ask, what is the great one worth?
Even then, it will be hard to pinpoint. What is a 5 year degree worth. Does a Masters make you a better teacher. Indeed, I would argue that some of the best teachers I have seen have been too busy working with and spending time with kids to enroll in the M.Ed.
At the end of the day, we need to remember that teaching is a vocation... a calling. Like the clergy, but without the celibacy thing. We teach because we want to give something back and we believe in the importance of what we do and the impact we have. If we wanted to roll in the $$$ we could have chosen a more lucrative occupation. We chose to teach.
9-1-1 and others have raised some interesting suggestions around $$$ for extra-curricular and the general scale for teaching, but I suspect the union would have nothing to do with it. Similarly, sicks days or a portion thereof could be bought out (many teachers have 200+ sick days they are never going to use and can't tranfer districts with them). Again, not a very "unionish" concept. Funny though, as was pointed out, the teachers doing the "extra" stuff are not complaining... they love what they do. They chose to teach.
In my small community school I am fortunate to have a staff that, for the most part, goes the extra mile. They coach, have clubs, do tutorials, participate in intramurals, watch teams play if they are not coaching, drive bus, chaperone, feed all the kids Christmas dinner, and so on. Their impact is one that a $$ sign does not fix to. The friendships, the home visits, the suicide interventions.... like Mastercard, priceless.
In many cases, we don't see the end product of our work and may not know of the profound impact we may have had.
That is why we teach. It is not about the $$ and as for administration, I would submit the extra $$$ does not = the longer days, more stress, more headaches, and more problems coming from other people. Just as teaching, I believe go into it to give something back, not for the "slush funds"??? or pay increase.
It will be interesting to see how this unfolds. Public perception is a killer, and as disastrous as "work to rule" was, a strike will not sit well, particulaly in Northern and remote communities struggling with high rates of unemployment.
The topic is huge, but I will throw in some general ramblings (far more diplomatically than in my earlier TTP days) to appease Regs.
There is never an easy answer to the teacher wages debate. Indeed, like most publice service jobs, value can be difficult to determine. Of course, in Medicine, if a patient needs emergency surgery... the value is clear. Then there is private specialization practice and the need/demand for breast enlargement. The paying public needs these things and will pay dearly, just as they will pay $$$ to watch movies or sporting events (but that is probably another thread).
How do you measure the value of public education, and that of individual teachers? It is not as simple as FSA scores and provincial exam results. How do rate the value of the person who instills the passion to become a doctor, lawyer, plumber, actor, athlete, or even, yes, a teacher? The importance of teachers in children's lives cannot be glossed over, or easily dismissed. Moreover, the argument of the "bad-teacher" or "lazy-teacher" seems to get far too much air time. Are there bad teachers out there, sure. Just as you have bad doctors, bad lawyers, bad plumbers, bad actors.... and so on. I can remember some less than stellar ones from my youth as well, but I remember more good ones. Then there are the great ones. Their impact is beyond measure. They challenge, inspire, empathize and console... and they don't do it for $$$. It is just part of who they are. So, instead of discussing teachers wages in relation to the "bad ones", perhaps you should ask, what is the great one worth?
Even then, it will be hard to pinpoint. What is a 5 year degree worth. Does a Masters make you a better teacher. Indeed, I would argue that some of the best teachers I have seen have been too busy working with and spending time with kids to enroll in the M.Ed.
At the end of the day, we need to remember that teaching is a vocation... a calling. Like the clergy, but without the celibacy thing. We teach because we want to give something back and we believe in the importance of what we do and the impact we have. If we wanted to roll in the $$$ we could have chosen a more lucrative occupation. We chose to teach.
9-1-1 and others have raised some interesting suggestions around $$$ for extra-curricular and the general scale for teaching, but I suspect the union would have nothing to do with it. Similarly, sicks days or a portion thereof could be bought out (many teachers have 200+ sick days they are never going to use and can't tranfer districts with them). Again, not a very "unionish" concept. Funny though, as was pointed out, the teachers doing the "extra" stuff are not complaining... they love what they do. They chose to teach.
In my small community school I am fortunate to have a staff that, for the most part, goes the extra mile. They coach, have clubs, do tutorials, participate in intramurals, watch teams play if they are not coaching, drive bus, chaperone, feed all the kids Christmas dinner, and so on. Their impact is one that a $$ sign does not fix to. The friendships, the home visits, the suicide interventions.... like Mastercard, priceless.
In many cases, we don't see the end product of our work and may not know of the profound impact we may have had.
That is why we teach. It is not about the $$ and as for administration, I would submit the extra $$$ does not = the longer days, more stress, more headaches, and more problems coming from other people. Just as teaching, I believe go into it to give something back, not for the "slush funds"??? or pay increase.
It will be interesting to see how this unfolds. Public perception is a killer, and as disastrous as "work to rule" was, a strike will not sit well, particulaly in Northern and remote communities struggling with high rates of unemployment.
Dial 9-1-1
Active Member
- Thread starter
- #63
Keeper said:
Do you really want to know or are you just trying to call my bluff, Keeps?
I think you're just trying to call my bluff.
~Pocket Aces
Wouldn't you agree, though, that most 'rookie' teachers improve with experience? What I understand from your argument is that you believe a teacher with many years of experience but who still hasn't improved (i.e. "a bad teacher") should have been "filtered" out at the education program stage. But really, how can you expect a formal interview to fully distinguish between those teachers and the ones that will improve over time. Don't you think that every profession has trouble with this. Aren't there bad doctors and bad lawyers as well? Do you really think those professions have a better bad teacher:good teacher ratios?
It seems to me that you actually have a larger issue with the union-paradigm than the acceptance practice of universities. I can agree from a personal nature that the union system is frustrating -- particularly for beginning teachers -- since it fails to recognize merit to the same extent as seniority. As little as a single day can make the difference between being awarded a contract or not, rather than one's abilities or skills in relation to a particular position.
It seems to me that you actually have a larger issue with the union-paradigm than the acceptance practice of universities. I can agree from a personal nature that the union system is frustrating -- particularly for beginning teachers -- since it fails to recognize merit to the same extent as seniority. As little as a single day can make the difference between being awarded a contract or not, rather than one's abilities or skills in relation to a particular position.
Dial 9-1-1
Active Member
- Thread starter
- #65
Bigun said:
Just because I liked your post so much, I'm not going to give the crappy teacher argument anymore air time.
Cheers,
Dial
Dial 9-1-1
Active Member
- Thread starter
- #67
Keeper said:
I already promised that I'd give no more airtime to this topic.
During the commercial break, however, I will add that bad doctors get sued and bad lawyers don't have clients. Bad actors/actresses don't get roles (unless they have really big tits).
.
Dial 9-1-1 said:
I've enjoyed reading these posts too. Nicely said Bigun. But of course as a teacher I just want to add my two cents (occupational hazard). You do realize that there will always be times when the TOC list runs dry. Its a balancing act because there are other months when you can get very little work and you wish the district had not hired so many TOCs. I remember when I first started I had one afternoon for the whole month of September.
I definitely disagree with the idea that districts are begging for TOC's.
~Mrs. Keeper
A teaching partner of mine had to reapply repeatedly to Delta School District to get on their TOC list even though she had been working in Coquitlam for 8 years. I, like the rest of the staff, think she is an wonderful teacher and am surprised that she wasn't snatched up immediately with her resume and reference letters.
OK, I'm finished ranting now.
~Mrs. Keeper
OK, I'm finished ranting now.
~Mrs. Keeper
Dial 9-1-1
Active Member
- Thread starter
- #70
Keeper said:
I hate sounding negative all the time, but
a) maybe she wasn't attractive to that district because she has 8+ years on the teaching scale and would be an expensive acquisition for that district? If she ever caught on full time, she's be costing the district $20,000 more per year than a newby would. Or
b) maybe they really wanted to hire her but there were already too many TOC's in that particular district.
Happy Dial chooses (b).
Keeper said:
Keeper,
I do believe that other professions have a better "good / bad" ration. All professions have the majority falling in the average / competent category. But, what is ironic, is that teaching is one of those professions, like medicine, where it is critical to the users (students, their parents) that there be a greater number of those "good" teachers. The reality is, however, that the system keeps around more of the "bad" teacher, for many of the reasons you and your missus have pointed out.
Again, in a private system, the law of the jungle sorts this out. If you don't perform to expectation, you are fired (or "laid off"), or your practice closes. For example, the advertising business is short one Dude nowadays because Dude couldn't cut it back in 1996 (I got "laid off"). But, the industrial air flirtation equipment market is short some other dude these days because I run a better business than him. It's the law of the jungle, and you can't honestly say the same thing about the teaching profession. It could also be argued that this would be more the case if teachers were better compensated; it would create a higher demand of good people getting into teaching, and make it tougher to the poor teachers to hang on to their posts. Again, this will never change as long as the union is around protecting jobs based on seniority.
Dial, you're still out to lunch. Besides, from the teachers I know- mostly through soccer, and there are a lot of them- it doesn't seem like many of them have forgotten how to party.
So, by your rationale (and it does make logical sense -- in practice, I'm not so sure), other unionized (public) professions should have similar percentages of bad employees. Nurses and police officers, both of which are critical to their users, work in similar organizational systems.
If so, then I can't disagree with your argument; but I'm just not sure that there really are so many of these "bad teachers" that have been mentioned over and over. Maybe I just haven't been around long enough, or need to start producing some of my own children to enroll in school.
If so, then I can't disagree with your argument; but I'm just not sure that there really are so many of these "bad teachers" that have been mentioned over and over. Maybe I just haven't been around long enough, or need to start producing some of my own children to enroll in school.
Yes, I'd apply the same argument.
I know a guy who simply wanted to get into policing because they had decent pay, good union benefits and long-term security. Great guy, he'd be a great cop, but I thought those were the wrong reasons. That said, I think Policing and the Fire Department seem to be a lot more stringent in the interview process, and do select only the cream of the crop. Maybe something to be said about the entry level and long term compensation package??? Dunno...
I know a guy who simply wanted to get into policing because they had decent pay, good union benefits and long-term security. Great guy, he'd be a great cop, but I thought those were the wrong reasons. That said, I think Policing and the Fire Department seem to be a lot more stringent in the interview process, and do select only the cream of the crop. Maybe something to be said about the entry level and long term compensation package??? Dunno...
Captain Shamrock
Well-Known Member
Bigun said:
Well said, Bigun, and to think it only took you a week to come up with that.......
BTW, what are your thoughts on the BCTF now, Bigun, since you enjoyed several years in that perch? Remember the extravagant all-expense paid trips to the most luxurious hotels you could find??? I hope things are going well for you and the family, Bigun.
Captain
Captain,
The best thing about those trips, was it was on your dime (and mine at the time). I never thought it was the best use of time or money, but somehow I felt good knowing that you were paying. Those were good BCTF days. At least I attended the meetings, unlike many of your colleagues. Now if only I could find those slush funds. Funny, since I left the union, those all expense trips have dried up.
I tend to be careful with "my thoughts" on the BCTF now, though they have not changed much from when I was a member. The union serves a valuable purpose in protecting its members. However, it would be nice if the primary purpose was the education of kids. Ideally, the union and admin should be on the same page in supporting teachers and helping improve practice where necessary, and, in some cases, recommendind alternative career paths. In the adversarial atmosphere we have, that is unlikely.
Bigun
The best thing about those trips, was it was on your dime (and mine at the time). I never thought it was the best use of time or money, but somehow I felt good knowing that you were paying. Those were good BCTF days. At least I attended the meetings, unlike many of your colleagues. Now if only I could find those slush funds. Funny, since I left the union, those all expense trips have dried up.
I tend to be careful with "my thoughts" on the BCTF now, though they have not changed much from when I was a member. The union serves a valuable purpose in protecting its members. However, it would be nice if the primary purpose was the education of kids. Ideally, the union and admin should be on the same page in supporting teachers and helping improve practice where necessary, and, in some cases, recommendind alternative career paths. In the adversarial atmosphere we have, that is unlikely.
Bigun
Captain Shamrock
Well-Known Member
Bigun said:
A well-thought out reply, Bigun. You must maintain your neutrality on the issue, which is very Swiss of you. And Dutch for that matter.
BCTFisbollocks CSC
I think is a good time to defend older teachers, like the Captain . I, like many on theis thread had the view point that many older teachers were brutal and only holding on for retirement. Of course this expert opinion was based soley on my expereince as a high school student and a few old, burnt out teachers. Since joining the profession five years ago my stance has changed. I agree there are some shocking teachers who needed to retire before they did but there was as many younger teachers that were awful as well. I can really only think of a handful of teachers that were like this of the many I have worked with a two schools but their is no point arguing they don't exist. (Although to state they are multiple, I would need to hear know what you opinion is based on before I even listened to it) I find the best teachers in the school are those with the most experience. They use thier knowledge (gained from years of teaching not schooling) to improve themselves. I think of what I was like my first couple of years teaching. 6 preps,(if you count PE as a prep) 4 classrooms and had everthing on a trolley. I was in way over my head and it was only with the help of veteran teachers I made it. I would also like to think I have changed markedly since I started using my experience as a guide along the way. Youth is not always the best solution for education. For coaching the baseketball team it helps but not for education and that is what parents should care about.
PS- Buying out sick time would be the best money saver the Liberals could do. Give teachers who are at the top of the scale a golder hand shake and replace them with new teachers who will take 12 years to get to that pay level and you would save millions of dollars for over 10 years. Good money idea, probably bad for the students. Suprised the Liberals haven't done it.
. I, like many on theis thread had the view point that many older teachers were brutal and only holding on for retirement. Of course this expert opinion was based soley on my expereince as a high school student and a few old, burnt out teachers. Since joining the profession five years ago my stance has changed. I agree there are some shocking teachers who needed to retire before they did but there was as many younger teachers that were awful as well. I can really only think of a handful of teachers that were like this of the many I have worked with a two schools but their is no point arguing they don't exist. (Although to state they are multiple, I would need to hear know what you opinion is based on before I even listened to it) I find the best teachers in the school are those with the most experience. They use thier knowledge (gained from years of teaching not schooling) to improve themselves. I think of what I was like my first couple of years teaching. 6 preps,(if you count PE as a prep) 4 classrooms and had everthing on a trolley. I was in way over my head and it was only with the help of veteran teachers I made it. I would also like to think I have changed markedly since I started using my experience as a guide along the way. Youth is not always the best solution for education. For coaching the baseketball team it helps but not for education and that is what parents should care about.PS- Buying out sick time would be the best money saver the Liberals could do. Give teachers who are at the top of the scale a golder hand shake and replace them with new teachers who will take 12 years to get to that pay level and you would save millions of dollars for over 10 years. Good money idea, probably bad for the students. Suprised the Liberals haven't done it.
Willis 316....
You miss the point of sick time buy out. Even if you pay say 25%, it would be a nice send off when people retire, NOT to force them out with the golden handshake. It would give people a reason to avoid using sick days "willy-nilly" and reward those who show up every day. This is not to suggest ALL sick days are abused, but some are 1.5 /month faithfuls. They might think otherwise if there were something at the other end. And yes, it would be a tremendous $$ saver as sub costs are killers, so even at 25% pay out, the savings on days not taken is huge.
You miss the point of sick time buy out. Even if you pay say 25%, it would be a nice send off when people retire, NOT to force them out with the golden handshake. It would give people a reason to avoid using sick days "willy-nilly" and reward those who show up every day. This is not to suggest ALL sick days are abused, but some are 1.5 /month faithfuls. They might think otherwise if there were something at the other end. And yes, it would be a tremendous $$ saver as sub costs are killers, so even at 25% pay out, the savings on days not taken is huge.
Let's stir it up again.
Teachers get paid way too much! I’m fed up with teachers and their hefty salary schedules. What we need here is a little perspective.
If I had my way, I’d pay these teachers myself! I’d pay them babysitting wages. That’s right! Instead of paying these outrageous school taxes, I’d give them $3 and hour out of my own pocket. And I’m only going to pay them for 5 hours, too . . . not for any coffee breaks. That would be $15 a day. Yup. Each parent should pay $15 a day for these teachers to baby-sit their child. Even if they have more than one child, it’s still cheaper than private day care.
Now how many children do they teach everyday? Maybe 25? That’s $15x25=$375 a day. But remember, those darn teachers only work 180 days a year! I am not going to pay them for all those vacations! Now, let’s see . . .$375x180=$67,500. (Hey, wait a minute, I think my calculator need new batteries.)
I know, I know . . . some teachers will whine “But what about those of us who have 10 years experience and a Master’s degree?” Well, maybe (to be fair) they could get a bit more – not quite the Liberal’s training wage, but just under. Let’s say $5 an hour. And maybe for that extra money, they could read the kids a story while they’re at it, too.
Hmmm . . . $5 an hour, times five hours, times 25 children. That’s $625 a day times 180 days. Let’s see . . . that’s $112,500 . . . HUH?!?
Wait a minute; let’s get a little perspective here. Maybe baby-sitting wages are too good for these teachers. Hey . . . did anyone see a salary-schedule around here?
Teachers get paid way too much! I’m fed up with teachers and their hefty salary schedules. What we need here is a little perspective.
If I had my way, I’d pay these teachers myself! I’d pay them babysitting wages. That’s right! Instead of paying these outrageous school taxes, I’d give them $3 and hour out of my own pocket. And I’m only going to pay them for 5 hours, too . . . not for any coffee breaks. That would be $15 a day. Yup. Each parent should pay $15 a day for these teachers to baby-sit their child. Even if they have more than one child, it’s still cheaper than private day care.
Now how many children do they teach everyday? Maybe 25? That’s $15x25=$375 a day. But remember, those darn teachers only work 180 days a year! I am not going to pay them for all those vacations! Now, let’s see . . .$375x180=$67,500. (Hey, wait a minute, I think my calculator need new batteries.)
I know, I know . . . some teachers will whine “But what about those of us who have 10 years experience and a Master’s degree?” Well, maybe (to be fair) they could get a bit more – not quite the Liberal’s training wage, but just under. Let’s say $5 an hour. And maybe for that extra money, they could read the kids a story while they’re at it, too.
Hmmm . . . $5 an hour, times five hours, times 25 children. That’s $625 a day times 180 days. Let’s see . . . that’s $112,500 . . . HUH?!?
Wait a minute; let’s get a little perspective here. Maybe baby-sitting wages are too good for these teachers. Hey . . . did anyone see a salary-schedule around here?
