The Case for Public Education - Part 2 in the Ed. Series

[Ardentfrost]

with demand-based economy, better teachers would be in higher demand, pay will increase and therefore attract people who are good teachers away from other markets that they are currently in.

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by bheld

Hold them accountable how? It's already a struggle to attract and keep teachers with the system we currently have. Now you want to hassle the few people that actually want the job? You don't get prime rib on a Burger King budget. If you keep trying to squeeze blood from a rock eventually you won't have any teachers left.

You can hold them accountable the same way as people are held accountable in other jobs. First, you could actually fire them if necessary (gasp). Secondly, teacher reviews should actually mean something (double gasp). In other fields if you get poor job reviews it effects your pay and your employment. In the teaching world, they're just a waste of time and money to even conduct.

And also it depends on where you are in regards to attracting teachers. In NJ there is a huge surplus of people looking for work in the teaching field. That is why the pay is so low. There are a ton of people knowing the pay, but go into the field because they're satisfied with the pay/hours/work/status quo. If that changed and the market demanded more from teachers you'd find less competition and more pay.

[WickedLou9]

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

with demand-based economy, better teachers would be in higher demand, pay will increase and therefore attract people who are good teachers away from other markets that they are currently in.

This sort of already happens but not in a free market way. well, not really anyway... Rich areas with higher property taxes pay higher salaries. They attract more applicants, and can choose better teachers. the poor areas offer low salaries and more problems with the kids and such. It's really a shame.

[RMNIXON]

Originally Posted by WickedLou9

yeah thats one of the thigns that bothers me about the teaching profession. My wife is a great teacher. She has her masters degree, she was named teacher of the year at her school, she is on the curiculum comittee, and she helps demonstrate methods to other teachers. She always gets the hardest kids and she always manages to turn them around...and what does she get for it? The same salary as the fat old teacher who doesn't give two shits and teaches from behind her desk. That's no way to run anything.

Absolutely, but they do it anyway!

[RMNIXON]

Originally Posted by WickedLou9

This sort of already happens but not in a free market way. well, not really anyway... Rich areas with higher property taxes pay higher salaries. They attract more applicants, and can choose better teachers. the poor areas offer low salaries and more problems with the kids and such. It's really a shame.

But if you had more school choice and less protectionism even in the poor areas the money would follow the better performance of teachers and the better run schools. With a voucher system for poor families they would have some control over where the money is going. Now it is automatic.

[bheld]

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

with demand-based economy, better teachers would be in higher demand, pay will increase and therefore attract people who are good teachers away from other markets that they are currently in.

Teaching isn't just something you change careers into. There's actually some preparation needed. Ditching the job security and moving into a labor free-for-all isn't exactly going to draw a lot of career changers either.

[bheld]

Originally Posted by JaJae

You can hold them accountable the same way as people are held accountable in other jobs. First, you could actually fire them if necessary (gasp). Secondly, teacher reviews should actually mean something (double gasp). In other fields if you get poor job reviews it effects your pay and your employment. In the teaching world, they're just a waste of time and money to even conduct.

And also it depends on where you are in regards to attracting teachers. In NJ there is a huge surplus of people looking for work in the teaching field. That is why the pay is so low. There are a ton of people knowing the pay, but go into the field because they're satisfied with the pay/hours/work/status quo. If that changed and the market demanded more from teachers you'd find less competition and more pay.

The market already demands a lot. Pay isn't keeping up which is why most new teachers are out of the classroom in 5 years or less. The statistics don't match up with your assertions.

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by bheld

Ditching the job security and moving into a labor free-for-all isn't exactly going to draw a lot of career changers either.

If you're not willing to change jobs then it's hard to say you're being underpaid. There are benefits to being a teacher that are nearly impossible to find elsewhere that can only be measured by the individuals desire to not give them up.

[Ardentfrost]

Originally Posted by bheld

Teaching isn't just something you change careers into. There's actually some preparation needed. Ditching the job security and moving into a labor free-for-all isn't exactly going to draw a lot of career changers either.

Some states DO allow the career change if you have a college degree. They do this specifically to give people more of a chance to try teaching, and then within three years they can go through some teaching classes and continue to do so if they want.

[Ardentfrost]

Originally Posted by bheld

The market already demands a lot. Pay isn't keeping up which is why most new teachers are out of the classroom in 5 years or less. The statistics don't match up with your assertions.

Statistics for what? Reasons why teachers leave the field?

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by bheld

The market already demands a lot. Pay isn't keeping up which is why most new teachers are out of the classroom in 5 years or less. The statistics don't match up with your assertions.

The market doesn't demand a lot. The reason teachers are being recycled is because of the pay. The pay is low because the market is flooded with teachers willing to work at that rate.

When I was in high school people with computer science degrees were coming out making $60k a year. By the time I finished college they were making under $40k Why? Because people flooded the market. As long as teachers have the deal they receive the market is going to continue to be flooded with youths who are enticed into teaching by the non-monetary benefits. The only way to solve this problem is to make teaching like any other normal job where teachers can actually be held accountable and receive pay based on performance. This would actually work to the advantage of the hard-working teachers.

[bheld]

Originally Posted by JaJae

If you're not willing to change jobs then it's hard to say you're being underpaid. There are benefits to being a teacher that are nearly impossible to find elsewhere that can only be measured by the individuals desire to not give them up.

I'm not really following you here. Are you talking about me personally?

[bheld]

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

Statistics for what? Reasons why teachers leave the field?

Not the reasons, just the fact that most are not teaching within a few years.

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by bheld

I'm not really following you here. Are you talking about me personally?

No. I'm talking about the market. If people are unwilling to leave the non-monetary benefits of their job to join the private sector then they're not underpaid. Their non-monetary benefits make up for it. It's a case-by-case basis. As long as there are plenty of people willing to accept the non-monetary benefits in exchange for lower pay there will always be a pay issue.

[bheld]

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

Some states DO allow the career change if you have a college degree. They do this specifically to give people more of a chance to try teaching, and then within three years they can go through some teaching classes and continue to do so if they want.

I know that that's what they DO, but it's pretty insulting to think that somebody can just out of the blue decide they don't like being an accountant and think they can just become a teacher. It's like me expecting to walk into a hospital and start working as a nurse because I've taken care of my sick kid before.

The point is, if anybody can do it then let's stop pretending like it even requires a college degree and we can just turn it into a regular blue-collar job like daycare. If Joe Schmoe can try it out for a while it just cheapens the job.

[bheld]

Originally Posted by JaJae

No. I'm talking about the market. If people are unwilling to leave the non-monetary benefits of their job to join the private sector then they're not underpaid. Their non-monetary benefits make up for it. It's a case-by-case basis. As long as there are plenty of people willing to accept the non-monetary benefits in exchange for lower pay there will always be a pay issue.

Most do leave. It's not a job most people keep for a substantial amount of time. The ones that stick around are mostly women that are not primary breadwinners in their household. That's why I said earlier that it won't ever be more than a job for spouses.

[Ardentfrost]

Originally Posted by bheld

I know that that's what they DO, but it's pretty insulting to think that somebody can just out of the blue decide they don't like being an accountant and think they can just become a teacher. It's like me expecting to walk into a hospital and start working as a nurse because I've taken care of my sick kid before.

The point is, if anybody can do it then let's stop pretending like it even requires a college degree and we can just turn it into a regular blue-collar job like daycare. If Joe Schmoe can try it out for a while it just cheapens the job.

Assuming you need to go to college to specifically learn to teach in order to be a good teacher is ludicrous. That method may produce a higher percentage of good teachers (compared to everyone else), but if an accountant wants to teach math, and is just a naturally good teacher, then you'd be a fool to prevent him from doing it. The only people who suffer from allowing him to teach are the kids to whom he would have taught math.

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by bheld

Most do leave. It's not a job most people keep for a substantial amount of time. The ones that stick around are mostly women that are not primary breadwinners in their household. That's why I said earlier that it won't ever be more than a job for spouses.

"Won't ever" is a strong implication. As long as the system is set up the way it is, perhaps. Again, I strongly believe the reason for it is because young students look at the work, pay, benefits and decide they want to go into the field and flood the market.

Take away the entitlements and all the extra benefits and make it like any other normal job and less people will want to go into teaching.

[bheld]

Originally Posted by JaJae

The market doesn't demand a lot. The reason teachers are being recycled is because of the pay. The pay is low because the market is flooded with teachers willing to work at that rate.

When I was in high school people with computer science degrees were coming out making $60k a year. By the time I finished college they were making under $40k Why? Because people flooded the market. As long as teachers have the deal they receive the market is going to continue to be flooded with youths who are enticed into teaching by the non-monetary benefits. The only way to solve this problem is to make teaching like any other normal job where teachers can actually be held accountable and receive pay based on performance. This would actually work to the advantage of the hard-working teachers.

The non-monetary benefits really aren't that great. It's not a very good job, at least not good enough to warrant such extreme supply of labor. The problem is that it's a common major for manhunters in college which cheapens the degree and creates a labor glut of teachers that will only work until they get married or get pregnant.