The top NY Times story today is about a new charter school which will pay its teachers the big bucks. $125k/year.
Bonuses on top. Very thin admin, year-round contract, etc.
What thinks you?
I like it. So does head of NYC teachers union. Experiment in different approaches for attracting, retaining, rewarding teachers.
The charter high where I work doesn’t pay more than the nearby averages, but a teacher typically gets two 8-hr-week assistants who helps her with grading papers, and usually teaches just 4 days a week (Fridays protected for planning and discussing individual kids with other teachers). That’s a different way to support teachers.
Please share widely!
When 25 year old lawyers make $160,000 right out of law school after having never worked a day in their lives (save for some summer or work-study jobs), it’s high time teachers get more.
<
p>Just so you all know, lawyers at large firms in Boston and elsehwere get automatic raises every year too, so after making “only” 160K, they get bumped to 170K their 2nd year, 185K the 3rd, 210K the 4th, 230K the fifth and 250K the sixth. They also usually get at least a 30K bonus.
<
p>And they probably work as many hours as a teacher does.
<
p>So, as I said before, it is way past the time when teachers should be paid this much.
<
p>Of course, I have no idea how to pay for it…
It causes a vicious circle of poverty and poor students.
<
p>However, I am in a similar boat in the “no idea how to pay for it” fashion.
How to pay? That’s the interesting thing. It’s not through fundraising.
<
p>Instead, they pay those $125k salaries with exact same per-pupil expenditures that other schools do.
<
p>They zero out support staff.
<
p>They get rid of a bunch of admins; instead have each teacher own an additional responsibility.
<
p>They have teachers do their own training, slightly higher class sizes, teachers run the summer school for no additional $, etc.
<
p>They basically hire fewer total staff.
Nurses work 8-12 hours a day, often six days a week, amd are responsible for lives. They have malpractice liability and pay for the insurance out of their own pocket. Tey are often subject to injury, assault and possible nosocomial infection. All for 65K a year or less.
<
p>I don’t want to hear about the plight of teachers. It’s BS!
…associates at major firms work 160k/yr and they are routinely recruited. They don’t work for Dad. This is commonplace, yet still only representative of the top 10% of law students. Check any major law firms web site. 160k is the standard for 1st yr associates.
<
p>I know a lot of nurses and not one of them pays for malpractice out of their own pocket. And with over time they can earn over 75k/yr in urban markets.
<
p>You are simply a BS artist.
…coming from, but this is a bad comparison. First year associates in large law firms make 160/yr and work on average 70 to 80 hrs/wk all year and keep up that pace for 5 to 7 years to keep earning those increases. Teachers do not work that much, they just don’t.
<
p>This is not to say that teachers should not earn more than they do, but disingenuous comparisons don’t help anyone.
I now subscribe to the view that teachers’ unions are the best friends that taxpayers have. I think rigid collectively bargained wage contracts, and the relatively small (2.5-3%) increases at any point in the salary scale keep potential high wage earners out of the fast lane. Bidding wars are constrained.
<
p>On the other hand, the principals and school superintendents, who are on individual contracts, have seen their wages increase with market forces.
<
p>2. Still, the 2.5% to 3% step increase is usually added to another 3% to 3.5% cost-of-living increase, no? So don’t most district teachers see a combined 6% increase most years?
<
p>That seems to be what pins most districts on budget….state/local revenues rise 4%, basic staff costs increase 6%.
<
p>So they’re -2%, and instead of controlling salaries, it’s “let’s cut art/music/tutoring/gym.”
The step increases come because we underpay the youngest teachers. Have you ever gone to a restaurant and found your kindergarten teacher waiting tables?
<
p>These young teachers need to wait many years, be it 8, 12, 16, or more, to work their way to the top of the salary scale.
<
p>If you are planning a budget, on average, the step increases are a wash because some people move up, and other people retire and are replaced by newer teachers.
<
p>The budget busters are not salaries. The busters are special education costs for high needs, medically involved children and health care costs for employees.
need to be added to the budget busters.
<
p>Capital improvements to maintain the assets of buildings, technology and equipment are compeletly underfunded if not downright ignored in current chapter 70 formulas.
<
p>Can we start with some simple merit/performance bonuses for talented, motivated teachers? It is pathetic that the incredibly terrific teachers get the same reward/compensation as those who suck. It is rare to see true consequences for under performance in public education and rarer to see rewards for excellence.
<
p>When the phase 2 of the MA health care program is implemented (Pres. Murray!), lets push for health insurance covering the medical issues being billed to education.
<
p>With the recent delivery of the enormous corporate welfare component of the health care legislation, I don’t think it is too much to ask that exec. compensation and admin. costs be regulated and schools stop paying for medical issues including therapies and behavioral health.
cost of living increases are about 1% to 1.5%. not sure what the step increase percentile is, but it doesn’t affect the whole staff, as a lot of younger teachers drop out and a lot of older teachers are maxed out.
When considering inflationary pressure on district budgets, you can’t forget what seem to be just about yearly double-digit increases in health care costs.
<
p>But to the larger point, yes, the unions do constrain bidding for the best teachers. I would even extend that argument to say that, by constraining bidding, the unions actually constrain instructional improvement because, not to be too cynical, if you are only ever paid in step, what’s the incentive to become a better teacher?
<
p>BTW, great comment string.
Personally, of the four teachers on my team, none of us ever have said “well, I’m only getting a fixed raise next year, so forget it.” Somebody who goes into teaching isn’t motivated by money, if for no other reason that the money isn’t worth it.
<
p>But there’s an uncomfortable truth that this discussion ignores. Not every teacher is a best teacher. Frankly, we don’t have enough teachers, period. Nevada and Florida are crying out for teachers, and I read recently of a school in New Bedford who had one applicant total for three positions. The level of public antipathy and ignorance about teaching (and the ever-increasing requirements) form a significant barrier to entry in the field, and bidding wars and the vision of contract negotiations only raises that further. While I and some of my colleagues would benefit from being able to peddle our services to the highest bidder, I think it would result in the following:
<
p>
<
p>Those are just some of the adverse effect of making us all free agents.
it was incredibly disheartening to me that the “system” offered no more incentive or reward for the talented, motivated, caring teacher as it did for the blob. Yet, unions have resisted merit pay increases. Could it not be true that the culture of education is at least in part responsible for the decline in interest, support and respect for the profession?
And I have to agree with HeartlandDem that nothing frustrated me more than step increases. I worked with a number of dedicated teachers, but there were some (as I imagine there are in every school – public or private) who were racing the kids out of school at the sound of the last bell. I deserved more than they did – more money and more recognition.
<
p>That being said, however, I, like you and your colleagues, did not go into teaching for the money. And your point about bidding wars possibly leading to less collegiality is a fair one. I might suggest you take a look at Denver, which has instituted both a (partial) autonomous hiring process and a merit pay system that is based both on individual teacher and whole school performance. The goal was to recognize individual teachers without undermining collegiality.
And experimentation is a good thing. I do find myself wondering how and where they’re going to accommodate special needs with those staffing levels.
<
p>Of course, it’s not only in politics where results impress me more than fancy plans. Check back in four years, and let’s see the success of this model, not just its novelty…
if the experiment is not documented, and then compared to other experiments such that you can see what was controlled for and what was a variable–and then what were the results.
<
p>Who is actually compiling the results of all these charter schools and educational experiments?
<
p>Maybe this will “work” but then again, do the kids’ demographic backgrounds indicate they’d graduate & go to college anyway? I’ve seen SO MANY newspaper articles on educational “innovation” and so few articles that reflect on what methods got what results.