Jump to content

Are the Teacher's going to get a raise?


Guest Bear_Den

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

And what is your role in education? :hmm:

 

just working hard every day as a parent to make sure my son is educated and not indoctrinated. not that it seems to be a real problem here. besides, what's this got to do with what i said? i simply state that there are some really terrific teachers, some that are mediocre, and some that should just really be doing something else. the good teachers are outnumbered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Come on AB... Obviously none of us are going to volunteer for our employers. Although I think you know what my intent was, I'll restate it. While I believe teachers certainly need the ability to earn a livable wage, I've always thought teachers' wages are where they are so that people whose principal desire is to "teach" are drawn to the profession rather than people primarily motivated by the dollar.

I do understand what you're saying, but I stand by what I said.

 

My primary motivation aside from money is a nice warm bed. It has been one of my goals in life to find a way to have my employer send me my checks, then, once a month or so, I can get out of bed, and take the check to the bank.

 

As you can guess, I had a hard time finding someone that will do that for me. Eventually, I had to do things that were hard, and now, I have my own company and I'm the boss, or at least one of them. All because I wanted money so I could eat and provide for those I love.

 

This doesn't mean that I don't have other motivations, some of them I think are just as noble as teaching or fighting fires or police work, or any of the other jobs whose rates tend to be set by the state. But I can't act on them if I can't eat.

 

As for a living wage, people have to eat. But the state has no business deciding what amount is required for a livable wage. When that's decided, without fail, it will be higher than what the market will bear. And it sets a floor. That makes it inflationary.

 

But if you take action, then let the market decide, say, by raising wages for teachers in ET, good teachers will come to take that money. And if you keep the wages high compared to other parts of the country, you will keep those high quality teachers for their entire careers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love taking tests. The tests we have to pass to get certified are plenty hard. You have to pass the professional development plus whatever subjects you choose to teach. Because of the shortage of teachers, there are other routes taken though. There are certification programs that allow you to begin teaching while you are "emergency certified" such as I Teach Texas. I don't know much about them except that they take a large chunk of your monthly paycheck for fees. Eventually, you still have to pass the state test to get certified. I could be wrong though. I took my tests in 1992, and I'm certified for life without having to keep up with professional development hours.

 

On the original question - I'm all for teachers having to take an aptitude test about every three years or so. It should be in the areas they teach though. There's no reason for me to take a World History or Pre-Calculus exam. Although it might be kind of fun taking that Pre-Cal test.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

'jayde' date='Feb 15 2008, 02:02 PM' post='929337'] i think teachers should get more money.... when they start working 12 months out of the year like most people in this country. that being said, i have a number of dedicated teachers who are worth their weight in gold but they are few and far in between. as for the rest, the less said the better. don't want to be accused of bashing.

 

Today is a really bad day to hit me with something like this. I teach 7th grade writing and 8th grade language arts. My students range in ability from mainstreamed to GT (gifted and talented). I have 130 students total. I work AT THE SCHOOL from 7:30 to 4:00 (paid contract time). Would you like to know how many nights I'm still at the school working while you're enjoying your evening? What I don't finish at school, I take home and work on. This includes preparing for my classes, preparing materials for TWO different sets of TAKS classes for six different teachers, grading, etc. These are hours for which I am NOT paid! During the summer I am usually at workshops, trying desperately to stay ahead of the education game.

 

I DO NOT get paid for twelve months. I am on contract for 186 days. I am paid a salary for those 186 days that is then divided by twelve months. I DO NOT get paid holidays.

 

I would LOVE to get paid for all the different "hats" I wear: counselor, parent, disciplinarian, mediator, mentor, etc., etc., etc.

 

Just as in ANY business, you have idiots who work there. I worked in the corporate world before I decided to teach. Most of the yahoos were VP's, presidents, managers, etc.

 

AAAAUUUUGGGGHHHH - You hit me on a REALLY bad day!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the original question - I'm all for teachers having to take an aptitude test about every three years or so. It should be in the areas they teach though. There's no reason for me to take a World History or Pre-Calculus exam. Although it might be kind of fun taking that Pre-Cal test.

 

 

I agree, except I believe that our principals, counselors, superintendents, etc., should have to enter the classroom and teach for a year - even if it is just one class - every five years. They do not have a clue as to the real classroom world!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the original question - I'm all for teachers having to take an aptitude test about every three years or so. It should be in the areas they teach though. There's no reason for me to take a World History or Pre-Calculus exam. Although it might be kind of fun taking that Pre-Cal test.

I don't think aptitude changes, but I know that attitude does.

 

I have been burned out a couple of times in my life. It's a tough thing to go to a job that you just can't stand anymore.

 

I want teachers to like their jobs. I want teachers to be motivated, and excited, and ready to share that with students. The best teachers do. But I've had teachers that I'm pretty sure would rather be somewhere else.

 

If taking a math test helps an english teacher keep focused, godspeed Lhornfan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AAAAUUUUGGGGHHHH - You hit me on a REALLY bad day!!!!!

 

i'm sorry i hit you on a really bad day. you sound like one of those teachers that i spoke of that are worth their weight in gold. i, on the other hand, have come across too many of the other kind of which i always wonder how on earth they could have earned a teachers certificate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

['jayde' post i always wonder how on earth they could have earned a teachers certificate.]

 

The same way bad-attitude bankers, accountants, lawyers, doctors, etc., got their degrees. In the school system, it all starts at the top ~ Attitude reflects leadership. If the administration does its job, it filters to the teachers. Bad teachers can't work where great leadership exists.

 

And, it's okay. Just not feeling well ... weather change makes the little ones go wild ....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, except I believe that our principals, counselors, superintendents, etc., should have to enter the classroom and teach for a year - even if it is just one class - every five years. They do not have a clue as to the real classroom world!

You hit the nail on the head!!! If I could only pick one of the three, I'd pick counselors. When I run out of desks in my room, they send a new student with a note that the janitor will find another desk.

 

PS - I like your post on the 12 month comment. I really didn't want to get into it with someone that obviously has no idea what they're talking about. I've got a stack of essays on my desk right now that are about to go home with me for the weekend. I'll get to them sometime between our scrimmage in Lindale on Saturday, church on Sunday, and spending time with my family.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PS - I like your post on the 12 month comment. I really didn't want to get into it with someone that obviously has no idea what they're talking about. I've got a stack of essays on my desk right now that are about to go home with me for the weekend. I'll get to them sometime between our scrimmage in Lindale on Saturday, church on Sunday, and spending time with my family.

Why would you even 'get into it' with someone who's obviously a concerned parent? There certainly are things that people that don't work in a trade don't know about that trade.

 

Why don't you try to inform rather than getting defensive? Have a conversation. Maybe you'll find that they do know what they're talking about, even if it's not quite from the perspective you hear when you talk to other teachers.

 

Jayde is a friend of mine, and although she may not know your workload or schedule, she is a parent of an exemplary kid, a great student and athlete.

 

If you listen, you might learn something you don't know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why don't you try to inform rather than getting defensive? Have a conversation. Maybe you'll find that they do know what they're talking about, even if it's not quite from the perspective you hear when you talk to other teachers.

 

Okay, let's turn the table. Here's what your friend said, "i think teachers should get more money.... when they start working 12 months out of the year like most people in this country."

 

Maybe she could have gotten more information before she made such a statement.

 

I didn't mean to offend you or your friend. I've heard the summers off comment ever since I started teaching and coaching. I also get a coaching stipend to go along with my teacher's pay. In order to receive that stipend, I spend quite a bit of the summer at the fieldhouse, in the weightroom with kids, or learning more about my job. It's my choice though, and I'm not complaining about my job. Therefore, I saw no need to "have it out" with someone that had no idea what I do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The state and local governments have shown reluctance in increasing teachers' wages, but I think that the federal government could certainly get them to change. For instance, the drinking age is a state mandated law. Knowing this, the federal government told states that they could only provide them with funding for new highways if the states' laws met certain conditions, i.e. if their drinking age was 21. Why can't something similar be done for increasing teachers' salaries? Just a thought, though I'm sure one of you will now tell me that this plan will destroy America and to keep my liberal, freedom-hating, communist beliefs to myself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, let's turn the table. Here's what your friend said, "i think teachers should get more money.... when they start working 12 months out of the year like most people in this country."

 

Maybe she could have gotten more information before she made such a statement.

 

I didn't mean to offend you or your friend. I've heard the summers off comment ever since I started teaching and coaching. I also get a coaching stipend to go along with my teacher's pay. In order to receive that stipend, I spend quite a bit of the summer at the fieldhouse, in the weightroom with kids, or learning more about my job. It's my choice though, and I'm not complaining about my job. Therefore, I saw no need to "have it out" with someone that had no idea what I do.

Why are you telling me? I know that most teachers work year round. As I said in an earlier post, my sister is a teacher, with lots of extra-curriculars. You should explain it to the one you didn't want to "have it out" with.

 

Turn-about again: If she didn't get the information from some combustible teacher, where would she find out? Granted, she might have phrased it in the form of a question. But, gee, if knowing that you know the correct answer and she doesn't won't tide you over long enough to tell her, go ahead, be offended.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The state and local governments have shown reluctance in increasing teachers' wages, but I think that the federal government could certainly get them to change. For instance, the drinking age is a state mandated law. Knowing this, the federal government told states that they could only provide them with funding for new highways if the states' laws met certain conditions, i.e. if their drinking age was 21. Why can't something similar be done for increasing teachers' salaries? Just a thought, though I'm sure one of you will now tell me that this plan will destroy America and to keep my liberal, freedom-hating, communist beliefs to myself.

I would never do that, I recognize the first amendment for it's very best quality.

 

Increasing teacher's pay from the federal level won't destroy America. America will take a lot more to destroy than politicians that can't tell the difference between drinking age and teacher's pay.

 

But, it won't especially help teachers and it won't help education in general.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Increasing teacher's pay from the federal level [...]

 

I didn't mean increasing federal spending. I understand that I didn't word that in the best way, and I apologize. What I mean is that the federal government could say to the states, "Allot more money for teachers' salaries or we'll cut your funding in (insert program)."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't mean increasing federal spending. I understand that I didn't word that in the best way, and I apologize. What I mean is that the federal government could say to the states, "Allot more money for teachers' salaries or we'll cut your funding in (insert program)."

I know you didn't.

 

I meant that federal government, even with the very best intentions, could only do so much.

 

One thing that I think the teachers suffer from is a side-effect of collective bargaining. For the most part, anyone represented by a union is seen by his employer as one of many, identical to all the rest. Teachers are treated as though they're cogs in a machine, because, in the rules imposed by collective bargaining they are. I know that some school systems have work-arounds for this problem. There are stipends for all the UIL stuff and yearbooks and newspapers, and I'm sure a lot more. But generally nobody gets paid for being exceptional, they get paid for doing more stuff.

 

If a single school system increases what they pay teachers compared to other districts, good teachers are more likely to compete for those jobs. Over time, good teachers will migrate to receive better pay. So, while the teachers are still treated as cogs by their employer, they're better cogs. And, other school districts surrounding that one, either live with losing the best teachers, or they increase the pay of their teachers. At least that way, the teachers get paid for the performance of the district. And hopefully, the district can see that paying teachers more helps the system.

 

If all the teachers, in all school systems across the country, get a raise just because, the schools don't change. The act of increasing pay would be neutral to the quality of education. It won't introduce competition on any level. That's what I meant when I said it won't help education.

 

And then, like Bloop said, it is an unfunded mandate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, except I believe that our principals, counselors, superintendents, etc., should have to enter the classroom and teach for a year - even if it is just one class - every five years. They do not have a clue as to the real classroom world!

 

 

While I'm all for admin knowing what's going on in the classroom, it is not their job to teach. They've done that and now are in admin. Don't know I have the answer as to educate them about the real life classroom. Maybe it's up to the teachers to let them know. I don't know. But I do know that admin, regardless of which profession they administrate, view the overall picture differently than those below them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The state and local governments have shown reluctance in increasing teachers' wages, but I think that the federal government could certainly get them to change. For instance, the drinking age is a state mandated law. Knowing this, the federal government told states that they could only provide them with funding for new highways if the states' laws met certain conditions, i.e. if their drinking age was 21. Why can't something similar be done for increasing teachers' salaries? Just a thought, though I'm sure one of you will now tell me that this plan will destroy America and to keep my liberal, freedom-hating, communist beliefs to myself.

 

 

No, but I will ask you where that extra money is going to come from. Drinking age and teacher pay are substantially different. To equate the two is comparing apples to oranges.

 

Why must we run to the federal government when things in our own communities don't suit us? And even if the money doesn't come out of the federal till, it comes out of the state till, and that till is funded by me.

 

Why create another federal law, especially one the feds have no business being involved in, nor would they fund?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...