View Full Version : Should teachers make more money?
AUTiger94
02-08-2006, 11:17 PM
You know where I stand on the subject. Here is something for you all to chew on. Someone sent me this in an E-mail recently.
>I'M TIRED OF THOSE HIGH PAID TEACHERS!
>>
>>I, for one, am sick and tired of those high paid teachers. Their hefty
>>salaries are driving up taxes, and they only work nine or ten months a
>>year!
>>
>>It's time we put things in perspective and pay them for what they
>>do...baby-sit! We can get that for less than minimum wage. That's
>>right......I would give them $3.00 dollars an hour and only the hours
>>they worked, not any of that silly planning time. That would be 15
>>dollars a day.
>>
>>Each parent should pay 15 dollars a day for these teachers to baby-sit
>>their children. Now, how many do they teach in a day....maybe 25. Then
>>that's 15 X
>>25=$375 a day. But remember they only work 180 days a year!
>>
>>I'm not going to pay them for any vacations. Let's see... *that's 375
>>x180= $67,500.00 (Hold on, my calculator must need batteries!)
>>
>>What about those special teachers or the ones with masters degrees?
>>Well, we could pay them minimum wage just to be fair. Let's round it off
>>to $6.00 an hour. That would be $6 times 5 hours times 25 children
>>times180 days =$135,000.00 per year.
>>
>>Wait a minute, there is something wrong here!!! There sure is,
>>huh????!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>
>>Make a teacher smile, send this to them!
GeauxTo
02-08-2006, 11:26 PM
That's a great piece. Teachers know that when you see a rock, you see the past; when you see a flower, you see the present; but when you see a child, you see the future. It is, without a doubt, the most noble profession on Earth.
Cianne
02-08-2006, 11:48 PM
That's a great piece. Teachers know that when you see a rock, you see the past; when you see a flower, you see the present; but when you see a child, you see the future. It is, without a doubt, the most noble profession on Earth.
My professors are cynical jerks.
ColonelKurtz
02-09-2006, 08:31 AM
As I've stated previously, the teaching profession is one chosen by special people who are unafraid of the challenge of instructing young skulls full of mush into functionally literate societal contributors. No different in my view than other professions which are of a public service orientation, I admire and appreciate those who take up the challenge.
That said, when one is compensated from the public's till, let the pay match the skill & performance of the individual. I am steadfastly against bracket pay schemes which reward those who despite their best intentions, just suck at it.
AUTiger94
02-09-2006, 09:03 AM
As I've stated previously, the teaching profession is one chosen by special people who are unafraid of the challenge of instructing young skulls full of mush into functionally literate societal contributors. No different in my view than other professions which are of a public service orientation, I admire and appreciate those who take up the challenge.
That said, when one is compensated from the public's till, let the pay match the skill & performance of the individual. I am steadfastly against bracket pay schemes which reward those who despite their best intentions, just suck at it.
i'm sorry but if you allow the Government to set pay according to performance, even the great teachers will be worse off than they are now.
ColonelKurtz
02-09-2006, 09:59 AM
i'm sorry but if you allow the Government to set pay according to performance, even the great teachers will be worse off than they are now.
Can't argue with your logic one bit, for if we all have learned nothing else, when we entrust our Government to oversee and judge performance in nearly any area outside of the military, we is in deep doo-doo.
If the will is there to hold teachers responsible for their performance, one can be found that will work. Problem is that in the tangled mess of interrelationship between the Fed & States & Localities, you've WAY TOO MANY layers of Uranuscrats gumming up the works. :D
AUTiger94
02-09-2006, 10:07 AM
Can't argue with your logic one bit, for if we all have learned nothing else, when we entrust our Government to oversee and judge performance in nearly any area outside of the military, we is in deep doo-doo.
If the will is there to hold teachers responsible for their performance, one can be found that will work. Problem is that in the tangled mess of interrelationship between the Fed & States & Localities, you've WAY TOO MANY layers of Uranuscrats gumming up the works. :D
I think that the answer lies somewhere in between. Let there be a base salary determined by # of degrees and years of experience, then have CLEARLY defined goals and incentives that focus on student achievement that can reward outstanding teachers.
If we throw out the step based salary, programs like music, band, and Health/PE would cease to exist.
Plus can you imagine the butt ( can I say that) kissing that would commense if you put the principals in charge of setting salaries?
ColonelKurtz
02-09-2006, 11:38 AM
I think that the answer lies somewhere in between. Let there be a base salary determined by # of degrees and years of experience, then have CLEARLY defined goals and incentives that focus on student achievement that can reward outstanding teachers.
If we throw out the step based salary, programs like music, band, and Health/PE would cease to exist.
Plus can you imagine the butt ( can I say that) kissing that would commense if you put the principals in charge of setting salaries?
I'ma feeling you there AUTiger94, for you're right, without the step pay for our Arts, Shop (Industrial Arts), and PE/Health instructors, those "principals" would quickly fill their positions with MORE "counselors" and "administrators" to oversee the other umpteen layers already there.
Hate to agree with you about the principals, but if there is a more political position in a school, tell me what it is.
AUTiger94
02-09-2006, 12:37 PM
I'ma feeling you there AUTiger94, for you're right, without the step pay for our Arts, Shop (Industrial Arts), and PE/Health instructors, those "principals" would quickly fill their positions with MORE "counselors" and "administrators" to oversee the other umpteen layers already there.
Hate to agree with you about the principals, but if there is a more political position in a school, tell me what it is.
Basically if your area of instruction isn't on the CRCT or whatever standardized test your state endorses, your salary would be low balled. If PE, Band,, art, etc. managed to survive qualified teachers would be impossible to find b/c they would be seeking employment elsewhere. Academic teachers already get their panties in a wad when they learn that those teachers are making as much or more than they are. Since many principals were once academic teachers, it is a no win for the band, pe etc. teachers.
Wincrimson
02-09-2006, 03:50 PM
Quick answer:
Some should, some shouldn't.
vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.