# Teachers Discussion



## Ender (Oct 9, 2003)

teaching is a low paid profession because almost anyone can do it and teachers are plentiful. all you need is a bachelor's degree to teach up to a community college level. some teachers only need "industry experience". if the wages for teaching went up dramatically, then current teachers would be driven out of the market by better candidates.

Kobe Bryant makes alot of money because he generate alot of revenue like ticket sales, advertizing, and merchandizing. They aren't paying Kobe to just play basketball, they are paying him to generate cash, which he does.


----------



## Cruentus (Oct 9, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Ender _
> *teaching is a low paid profession because almost anyone can do it and teachers are plentiful. all you need is a bachelor's degree to teach up to a community college level. some teachers only need "industry experience". if the wages for teaching went up dramatically, then current teachers would be driven out of the market by better candidates.
> *



Oh man....I can't believe you just went there...

Um....Robert? I'll just sit back and watch the fight. opcorn:


----------



## Ender (Oct 9, 2003)

*LOL...well??..it's true.....


----------



## rmcrobertson (Oct 9, 2003)

Yeah Paul I see it...now...lead it...what's the wind? OK...

"teaching is a low paid profession because almost anyone can do it and teachers are plentiful. all you need is a bachelor's degree to teach up to a community college level. some teachers only need "industry experience". if the wages for teaching went up dramatically, then current teachers would be driven out of the market by better candidates."

I quite agree about the reasons for Mr. Bryant's salary, to begin within. Indeed, that was my point: glad you agree.

As for the assertion that, "almost anyone can do it." Sure, right. How well? I take it that you don't teach. 

I'm trying to think of how to say this without tooting my own horn...well, after two and a half years undergrad, seven grad (at an Ivy League school, I might add) twenty years' teaching at university, college, and community college, my society values my education, experience and expertise at approximately 1/100th the level it values that of a basketball player less than half my age. 

This may be a testimony to my society's love of money, but it sure as hell isn't testimony to anything resembling fairness or any rationality other than that of the market. You may be OK with the notion that Only Money Really Counts: I am not.  

Let me add that an important reason for low teachers' salaries lies in a) a history of teaching being done at the lower levels predominantly by women; b) our country's ongoing refusal to decently fund public education.

I make a comfortable-enough living, no question about that. My question is, why ain't that enough for everybody? Answer: because we've built a world in which things and dollars matter more than people.


----------



## Ender (Oct 9, 2003)

well california pays at, or near the top per pupil in the nation, and we are just about dead last in ranking. So no, funding is not the issue. lots of teachers try to point the blame there, but there is no scientific or statistical evidence that increased funding will lead to increased scores or grades.

and most of California's teachers have a bachelors of arts degree or in education. many of them can barely pass an algrebra class required at the university level.  So my statement still stands, almost any university graduate can teach.

I have a teacher friend, she teaches 2nd grade at the local elementary school with 5 years experience. she received a BS in liberals arts, and makes $62k a year working 9 months. she says teaching isn't very difficult but the bureacracy and the union is what is killing education.

This is a capitalistic society built on competition and freedom. They tried building one on "worker's right and socialisitc values". it failed miserably.


----------



## rmcrobertson (Oct 9, 2003)

Sorry, Ender, but I just rechecked on the LAUSD, the California State Dept. of Ed., and the US Dept. of Education, websites. Your figures are grossly inaccurate.

I might also suggest that if your friend really has such contempt for their job, they should quit doing it.

I realize, of course, that this won't change your mind a bit. And that's OK. 

Education has a lot of problems. These include bureaucracy, and the ineptitude of teachers. They also include the politicization of schools by right-wingers, the commercialization of schools by corporate interests, the systematic gutting of the curriculum by those who are afraid their kids might learn about reality (you know...evolution...the holocaust...the Vietnam War), and the systematic retreat from funding the sort of public education I got, free more or less, as a kid.

In California, for example, the so-called "taxpayers' revolt," led directly to the collapse of a public education system that was nearly without peer in the world.

So I'll confront the errors of the ways of unions and lefties...a long list......if you'll agree to deal with fiscal reality, and the looniness of right-wingers these days...


----------



## pknox (Oct 9, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Ender _
> *and most of California's teachers have a bachelors of arts degree or in education. many of them can barely pass an algrebra class required at the university level.  So my statement still stands, almost any university graduate can teach.*



Ender:

Sorry to call you out on this one, but you are just plain wrong.  I am a teacher, and like in any profession, I have dealt with people of various competency levels -- some brilliant, some so spastic that I was amazed they made it to work with two pairs of shoes on.  They all had "university degrees" - some a few of them.    A "university degree" may be your entrance to the classroom, but not everyone who has one can teach.  If you are arguing that they have the competency level in their chosen subject to spit out info about their subject, than fine, I agree with you.  However, teaching is a heck of a lot more than just subject level competency.  At heart, it is a profession that requires an almost ridiculous amount of patience -- children, parents, administrators, and sometimes even complete strangers all put up every obstacle possible to prevent you from succeeding.  Those who do not have a sincere love for what they do, as well as a genuine desire for helping children, will not last, period.  There are plenty of people out there with "university degrees" in a variety of subjects -- but there are a precious few that combine that desire with the level of patient that is necessary, as well as the amount of concern that is crucial, to succeed in the profession.

BTW -- your friend is not a typical example.  I teach in NJ, which has the highest average teacher salary in the U.S. ($51K per last year's figures) -- the average starting salary is about $32K.  After 5 years, the average teacher makes between 40 and 45K, depending on the district - it varies widely, but I can tell you that nobody in NJ with 5 years experience is making $62K, even if they have a doctorate.  Most districts top out at below 80K, and that's only with a doctorate and 20+ years of service.  That's all well and good, and probably sounds like a lot of money to people in quite a few states out there, but you must take cost of living into account.  The average NJ worker makes $65K, and that takes into account the southern part of the state as well, where salaries are much lower.  If you were only to count northern and central NJ, some people believe the average is closer to $80K.  So the average teacher makes a little over half of what the average worker makes.  And we trust them with our kids.  

And no disrespect, but if your friend says teaching isn't very difficult, my guess is she isn't doing her job nearly as well as she thinks she is.


----------



## Ender (Oct 9, 2003)

Victor High School / Victor Junior High School

Band Resource Specialist

Math


Silverado High School / Cobalt Middle School

Band 

Physical Education

Specialist Mild/Moderate



Must hold or be eligible for the appropriate certification to serve in the listed area.



Salary Placement Commensurate with experience $33,648 - $67,296

Maximum salary placement step 9 for new hires

Salary will be prorated for actual days, based on annual shown.


Benefits District-paid medical, dental and vision benefits for employees and family: life insurance for employee only.



Closing Date Open Until Filled
..................................................................................................

looks like they are paying PE teachers between 33 to 67K...hmmmm....guess my figures aren't as "grossly inaccurate" as you thought.


and my friend was awarded top teacher at her school....then it again, it could be too easy for her?*G..and btw she got to 62K after 4 years experience...and her husband is a vice principle at 107K at a different school. now try to tell me educators are under paid. I don't buy it.


my solution would be to not make school compulsory after 12 years old. all those students who cause trouble or don't want to be there may be excused from school. if after an expulsion, they must pay tuiton as a private school to regain entrance. I bet you'll see alot more parental involvment. no where in the constitution is an education a right. it is a privilege and must be treated as such.


----------



## pknox (Oct 9, 2003)

Dude - The 67K is for top of the range.  That is someone with the highest step, which is usually 20+ years.  That's also why they say the max salary step is 9.  That should be someone with about 9 years experience.  If you have 20 years experience, and you shift districts, you get paid like you have 9 in this case.  That max number would only be for someone with the highest placement (def above 9) - and could only be internal to the district (i.e. not a new hire). It also is the range for ALL of the positions, not each one.  My guess is the top is for the Specialist, because that sounds like a Special Ed position, which most districts have trouble filling, due to the nature of the job. 

A vice principal making 107K is not out of line.  They need to have at least 5 yrs experience (usually WAY more, but the book says 5 -- I've never seen a VP hired without at least 15 yrs on the job), usually require a masters degree, work year round, and have the most cruddy job around (besides perhaps the principal, who is paid more).  Does the average teacher make close to that?  No.

As for the teacher of the year thing, let me just say that doen't always go to the best teacher, but sometimes the one that plays the game the best.  Perhaps your friend is a wonderful teacher, and has natural talent for it.  That doesn't mean everybody does.  I bet for Arnisador, multivariable calculus is easy, but it makes my head spin.  Different people have different strengths.  My point is that just like not everybody can be a mathematician, not everyone can be a teacher.  At least not a good one.


----------



## pknox (Oct 9, 2003)

Here's something else I was sent a while ago, that perhaps is relevant to the discussion...


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 vcations. 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 times 180 days =$135,000.00 per year.

Wait a minute, there is something wrong here!!!


----------



## lvwhitebir (Oct 10, 2003)

> _Originally posted by pknox _
> *Here's something else I was sent a while ago, that perhaps is relevant to the discussion...*



Nice post!  It sure makes you think...  It bugs me when people are willing to pay hundreds of dollars to go see a sports team play, but complain when they have to pay $50 for a school book.  Are we so lame that we'd pay anything to be entertained, but God help us if we do something to improve society?

WhiteBirch


----------



## Ender (Oct 10, 2003)

Pknox:

dude, keep up with the convo...I said my friend was making 62K after 5 years experience!!..and her hubby was vp at 8 years experience making over 100K. My point is that teachers are not necessarily as under paid as everyone thinks. yes , the STARTING salaries at pretty low, but they do that purposely do weed people out.


----------



## pknox (Oct 10, 2003)

Yes -- I'm aware of her experience level as you stated.  That is why I posted starting and average salaries.  But also look at the ad you posted:



> *Salary Placement Commensurate with experience $33,648 - $67,296
> 
> Maximum salary placement step 9 for new hires
> *



And as I said, realize that is a range...if you don't believe me about that being the top of the range and being likely 20+ years of experience, that's fine (realize though, that while pursuing a job as a teacher, I have literally read THOUSANDS of these ads, and have responded to dozens of them, and in every case, was told that the salary range reflected all positions in the ad, and that the top salary was the top of the range).  Look at the ad then.  It says max salary placement = step 9.  Even if you believe that the $67K is for step 9, your friend should not be at step 9 after 5 years with a B.S.  She should be at step 5, step 6 tops.  

If she does make that much money (and Ender, don't misunderstand me here - I'm not accusing you of lying, I'm sure she does make that as you said - I'm just saying it's not a normal representative figure in my experience), and if there are many others like her, than Cali is not a very good representative example of the nation as a whole.  Most teachers have to work at least 10-15 years to make the kind of money you're friend is making with a B.S./B.A. - if they get an advanced degree, perhaps they can cut that down to 8-10.  And I'm talking about historically high paying states like NJ, CT, PA, and VA -- not states like AK, MS, or LA, where a teacher will likely never make that much, regardless of time in, due to the lower cost of living.  Realize also that in the private sector, with jobs that require a bachelors degree, the salary level to experience level ratio is about the same, if not lower for the teachers (think what a web designer with 10 years experience makes vs. teachers in the area).  

If she does make that, maybe she is in a special demand position, and/or works in an area with a very high cost of living, or has some other special situation with her district.  I hope you are right though -- if teachers in Cali make that after 5 yrs, I'm seriously considering moving there.  As if the constant sunshine and Gracie Academy weren't enough, a higher salary would very much sweeten the deal. 

And as for the VP, realize that he is not a teacher with classroom duties -- he is an administrator, with completely different responsibilities and criteria for his job.  Again, think about what is done in the private sector.  It is all a matter of supply and demand, as well as society's perceived worth of a profession.  When I worked for an Internet company, I pulled in close to 70K, and the project managers above me made between 100 and 110K.  My teaching job was infinitely harder than my Internet one (not to mention more important, as I didn't hold children's futures in my hand when supervising web page design), and the PM's above me had a MUCH easier job than any VP I've ever met.  Part of the proof of this is the fact that even at 110K+ for VP's, most districts have problems filling the job and keeping people, because the job sucks and nobody wants it.


----------



## Ender (Oct 10, 2003)

California spends near the top per pupil yet we rank near the bottom. Yet I keep hearing we need to increase money into the system. If this was run as a business with competition, salaries, etc, then this system would be bankrupt.  

The other day I had to talk to someone who is in charge of refrigerators for the cafeterias of LAUSD. I then wanted to talk about a freezer and I had to talk to someone else in charge of freezers!!!...wtf?...do we really need two bureaucrats to handle refrigeration needs??

 step 1-9 is ALSO way to provide "incentive" levels for teachers. Meaning you can move up in pay with better performance. And I agree with that, people should be paid for superior job skills . So a good teacher can make a good salary here. But don't try to tell me they are terribly underpaid.


----------



## rmcrobertson (Oct 10, 2003)

Well, that was self-contradicting. 

Teachers are overpaid, well, no they're not, but we underpay them to weed them out so we can overpay them.

I also note that you conveniently skipped over all the other little issues I mentioned...for example, the rightist attack on education. Or the historical fact that the underpayment of grade school teachers dates back to when they were mostly women...

Please prove to me that teachers are paid better yet more corrupt, lazier, or generally indifferent than, say, CEOs and military procurement officers...

It's sure easier to blame, them, though, what with schools being hotbeds of lesbian ideology and America-bashing...just wanted to mention it first, since I'm sure it was coming.

I repeat: if you'r friends are really that incompetent, cynicical and indifferent, your proper moral course is to advise them to quit.

I repeat: you don't teach, do you?


----------



## pknox (Oct 10, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Ender _
> * step 1-9 is ALSO way to provide "incentive" levels for teachers. Meaning you can move up in pay with better performance. And I agree with that, people should be paid for superior job skills . So a good teacher can make a good salary here. But don't try to tell me they are terribly underpaid. *



OK.  Then California is a bad example.  As for where I live, they are underpaid.  It is quite possible that the CA system is rife with corruption and redundancy, which would go a long way in explaining the higher salaries.  It would also go a long way in explaining the situation they are currently in, so I don't doubt it.

BTW -- notice I never said your friend was overpaid, just she made more than normal.  Personally, I think she deserves $62K for what she does, even with 5 years of experience.  Think of it this way - if I'm a web producer with 5 yrs in making 62K and I decide to blow off a client, so what.  They get pissed, go somewhere else, and eventually get what they want.  However, as a teacher, if I decide to give up on your kid, then I may very well have ruined his life, or at least severely reduced his chances of future success.  Considering the amount of responsibility that assumes, who would you rather pay more?  The basic comparison is this: the first person makes money, while the second one makes a difference.


----------



## khadaji (Oct 10, 2003)

> teaching is a low paid profession because almost anyone can do it and teachers are plentiful. all you need is a bachelor's degree to teach up to a community college level. some teachers only need "industry experience". if the wages for teaching went up dramatically, then current teachers would be driven out of the market by better candidates.



not to repeat or anything, but that is crazy.  I am no expert nation wide, but, in MN, You need a lot of training, and certification to Teach, oh, and a full degree...  

As one who has done all the work to become a teacher, I find the comment that anyone can do it insulting.


----------



## pknox (Oct 10, 2003)

> _Originally posted by khadaji _
> *I am no expert nation wide, but, in MN, You need a lot of training, and certification to Teach, oh, and a full degree...
> *



That is pretty indicative of how it works nationwide as well.  While the different test(s) you must take vary widely by state, as far as I know, every state requires at least one certification test (many require two or even three), a bachelors degree is required for all but the most non-academic subjects (agriculture, industrial arts, and driver education for example- and most states _prefer_ you have one even in those cases, as they like to hire teachers for those subjects only when they have certification in another area as well, as it is more cost effective than hiring two teachers) - a liberal arts one will suffice for elementary education, but if you wish to teach on the secondary level (9th-12th), you must have a degree, or at the very least, "significant coursework" (the definition of which varies by state, here in NJ it is 30 credits) in the subject area in which you plan to teach.  Applicants must either have graduated from an accredited teaching college, or in the case of "alternate route" applicants (not allowed in every state) complete a few classes of education-specific classwork (unpaid, and on their own time, usually weekends or evenings - many districts require you pay for the classes, some foot the bill) and a mentoring experience within the first year of teaching.  Even if you have graduated from a teacher's college, you must complete the mentoring experience (which you also pay for through payroll deduction).  My state (NJ) also requires that applicants submit to a criminal background check and be fingerprinted -- I'm not sure if every state follows suit, but I believe most do.

All in all, it's actually a pretty complex process, and does take a bit of time to complete.


----------



## qizmoduis (Oct 10, 2003)

School teachers do not work 9 months and get a 3 month vacation.  That's a crock.  School years are generally 9.5 to 10 months.  My district (my daughter's in first grade) goes from the last week of Auguest to the end of the second week of June, leaving 8 weeks of no school.

The teachers don't just quit on the last day of school.  My mother was the secretary of the school in my old neighborhood in Altoona.  The school building itself didn't empty until the end of June.  The teachers came back at the beginning of August to begin preparations for the new school year.

So, perhaps they get 4-5 weeks of vacation per year, which is not too uncommon among salaried professionals.  It's more than I get, true.

Ender is just projecting the typical right-wing anti-education mindset that has plagued our education system for decades now.  Every time they get into power, their first target is an area's school systems.  Children, of course, don't vote.  It's much easier to lead an uneducated populace than an educated one.  When poorly educated children age into ignorant adults, you have a much easier time getting re-elected and getting your pet pork projects rammed through the system.

As to the idea that almost anyone can be a teacher:  Bull[censored].


----------



## MisterMike (Oct 10, 2003)

> Ender is just projecting the typical right-wing anti-education mindset that has plagued our education system for decades now. Every time they get into power, their first target is an area's school systems. Children, of course, don't vote. It's much easier to lead an uneducated populace than an educated one. When poorly educated children age into ignorant adults, you have a much easier time getting re-elected and getting your pet pork projects rammed through the system.



I think right-wing folk are more supportive of Private education than feeding the failing public education facilities. To say anti-education is inaccurate.

I also don't think the politicians have to worry about leading the uneducated since most liberals for opening our boarders and aiding the "undocumented immigrants" (ILLEGAL Aliens). That is where they wish to derrive their voting base.


----------



## lhommedieu (Oct 10, 2003)

Anyone who thinks that teachers are overpaid and underworked should try teaching a 2nd grade class for a day.

Best,

Steve Lamade
14 years experience (and counting), NYC public school teacher.

P.S. Over 50% (and in some recent years, over 75%) of first-year NYC public school teachers end up leaving the profession within 5 years).  "I can get paid more doing something easier" probably ranks up there among the reasons.


----------



## Ender (Oct 10, 2003)

*LOL...funny how people can read something and still get it wrong. I never said they overpaid and underworked. I have said they are not underpaid, and I gave proof of salaries paid here.

but hey, you too can pump more money into "feel good, self esteem, left wing" education like California, and have your children score at the bottom of standardized test scores.*G...

If you open the education system up to a market system you'll most likely have teachers who make 6 figures...AND you'll have some that will be fired or remain at low wages. But the union will lose it's power, the bureaucracy will fight it tooth and nail, and politicians will lose a power base.


----------



## rmcrobertson (Oct 10, 2003)

"I think right-wing folk are more supportive of Private education than feeding the failing public education facilities. To say anti-education is inaccurate.

I also don't think the politicians have to worry about leading the uneducated since most liberals for opening our boarders and aiding the "undocumented immigrants" (ILLEGAL Aliens). That is where they wish to derrive their voting base."

Sure. All this, and the Holy Market solves everything. 

Fiddlesticks. First off, folks can blather about privatizing education as much as they want. What they really mean is this: it's come to my attention that immigrants, the poor, and colored people are getting an education on what I think is my dime. This is bad, and leads to social unrest, and even worse, the threatening of what I think is my position. It must stop. 

I'd recommend going back and reading, say, Sinclair Lewis' "Babbitt." Sad part is, a lot of the folks advocating this nonsense don't ever realize that they and theirs are going to be its first targets.

Second...I am a product of American public ed, and proud of it. Kindergarten, grade school, high school (OK, not so proud of that), college--nothing private until grad school. If I had to get through college now, I'm not sure I could.

Why? Money, and the increasing lack of access to it by students who ain't rich. One example: when I was in college and grad school, I had virtually no income--full-time student, worked at it between 70 and 100 hours a week (no, I'm not exaggerating), so I paid virtually no taxes.

Year after I got out of grad school, I got a letter from the IRS. They'd changed the tax code (this was Ronald Reagan's government, incidentally) so that tuition and fee waivers from my University were counted as income. The school backed me up, as did all the Ivy Leagues that year for their students, and I didn't get stuck with it.

Three other people I knew did get stuck...with the tax bills for several years back, on 30,000/year income when in fact they barely had a summer job stocking books in the library. 

In this, and a host of other ways, the Power That Be are closing the door on education for everybody who isn't born rich.

You might also want to note what's happened in California with higher ed...thousands got bounced because of money.

Guess we'll have to fix the Statue of Liberty, so she'd giving the world the finger and the sign on the bottom reads, "PISS OFF."


----------



## Touch Of Death (Oct 10, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Ender _
> *teaching is a low paid profession because almost anyone can do it and teachers are plentiful. all you need is a bachelor's degree to teach up to a community college level. some teachers only need "industry experience". if the wages for teaching went up dramatically, then current teachers would be driven out of the market by better candidates.
> 
> Kobe Bryant makes alot of money because he generate alot of revenue like ticket sales, advertizing, and merchandizing. They aren't paying Kobe to just play basketball, they are paying him to generate cash, which he does. *


Oh, where do you teach?


----------



## MisterMike (Oct 10, 2003)

I think that by "blathering" about private schools they mean to say they prefer no overcrowding, quality education that isn't read from a national teaching plan, safer school grounds, and a general more bang for the buck. Of course they're still going to get soaked with taxes to support everyone else's public education.

This whole "angy white threatened conservative male" is a false image given by the left.


----------



## Ender (Oct 10, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Touch'O'Death _
> *Oh, where do you teach? *



doesn't matter does it?*L


----------



## Ender (Oct 10, 2003)

> _Originally posted by MisterMike _
> *I think that by "blathering" about private schools they mean to say they prefer no overcrowding, quality education that isn't read from a national teaching plan, safer school grounds, and a general more bang for the buck. Of course they're still going to get soaked with taxes to support everyone else's public education.
> 
> This whole "angy white threatened conservative male" is a false image given by the left. *



EXACTLY!!..there's a reason why private school and home schooled students do better than the public school students. Those are the models we need to target. just as business has had to adjust to change, so does education.

And I am neither angry nor white..*l


----------



## Cruentus (Oct 10, 2003)

I think you all should think real hard before you toss around your right-winged crap.

I worked in Rochester Schools for 5 years...started off as an assistant after high school in special ed., and eventually ended up teaching math to high schoolers at an alternative center.

The fact is, I worked with some damn gifted kids who now have decent careers in both college and in real world jobs. They are happy taxpayers, and contributers to society. Many of these kids who were poor, didn't have the $$ to go to "private schools," and had all been "in trouble" at some point, landing them at the alternative center. These kids would have "fell though the cracks."

You know where the kids who "fall through the cracks" end up, folks? IN JAIL! I have a few students who I couldn't "save" who ended up there. The fact is, if we don't take care of EVERY kids education with OUR TAX $$, poor, middle class, or rich, then we will have to PAY MORE FOR THEM LATER IN OUR JAILS!

I don't know about you, but I'd rather fund better public education with my tax dollars then fund more prison space, or have to worry one of those kids who were "left behind" robbing me in the parking lot due to increased crime. THINK about THAT before you spout your do-do.

You can also think about this FACT before you spout more pop placing private ed. on a pedistal: Private Education often has LOWER standards for teachers, and they impose lower standards on the students. I know this because while I was going through my certification, I had private schools trying to hire me for 20K a year (and sometimes less) BEFORE I was done with college! Many of these private schools suck...bottom line. I find it ironic how "the right" talks about "higher standards in schools" and then pushes privite education, where there is NO standardized testing or measurements. Worse, the parents get sucked into thinking that their kids will get a better education then in the "secular" schools, which is laughable. Now Granted, there are some Private schools that do have very high standards, but they are usually very expensive to attend. 

So...take that...you...you... conservative faces! I am currently calling as many dirty hippies as I can find to picket your houses!
:rofl: 

[side bar: no...I am not really upset. I am just kidding about the doody stuff. I am actually serious about my other points, however, and I think there is some validy to the education/crime connection, and there have been studies done on the subject].


----------



## Cruentus (Oct 10, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Ender _
> *EXACTLY!!..there's a reason why private school and home schooled students do better than the public school students. Those are the models we need to target. just as business has had to adjust to change, so does education.
> 
> And I am neither angry nor white..*l *



:rofl: I'm angry and white! Hey...how many kids do YOU have in private education?


----------



## Touch Of Death (Oct 10, 2003)

> _Originally posted by MisterMike _
> *I think that by "blathering" about private schools they mean to say they prefer no overcrowding, quality education that isn't read from a national teaching plan, safer school grounds, and a general more bang for the buck. Of course they're still going to get soaked with taxes to support everyone else's public education.
> 
> This whole "angy white threatened conservative male" is a false image given by the left. *


Oh you mean members of largest voting block and not to mention the holders of most if not all of the money, are as content as all get out. Damn those liberals messing with our heads again!


----------



## Touch Of Death (Oct 10, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Ender _
> *doesn't matter does it?*L *


Actualy it does matter because I'm trying to figure out weather or not you are part of the problem or the solution. Part of the problem with public education is that parents sit at home and explain to the kids what idiots their teachers are and then expect their kids to do well and respect adults. If the parents don't respect anything then their kids will not either. What we seem to have here is a lot of people just chomping at the bit to dismantle public education in favor of smaller private instituions that keep their kid away from everyone else's ,good for nothing, kids. The last I checked teachers were paid less than anyother profession for the amount of education required. This is a throw back from the old school marm days when teaching is just what some young ladys did before they were married( like Miss Crabtree on little rascals). Anyways I see you trying to destroy a proffesion that for the most part has always been broke and since Robert stole the "fiddlesticks" comment I say poppycock! Public education is our nations only hope. Enforced parenting is what our kids need not a revamping of the education system by a bunch of folks such as yourself that only think they understand the problem.
Sean


----------



## Ender (Oct 10, 2003)

*loading my my right wing crap cannon with the mother of all bombs....


oh please, not the education or jail tripe!!!..egads!!

actually there's a greater link between immates in jail and the lack of fathers in the household growing up. If you want to attack the jail issue you would do better to promote mother/father families. I know the PC thing is to say if we educate people there would be less of them in jail. But.......in talking to a Juvenile Probation officer ,who backed up the research I did, He said 75% of these kids come from single parent families. these kids have a lot of hostility directed at the missing parent. now i'm not saying that single parents are bad (before we get these "my mother was a single parent and I turned out ok" stuff. But the fact is that parenting is a tough job and two parent familes are better than one.

an actual incident happened when one chaplain at a jail decided to pass out mother's day card for the inmates to send to their mothers. he had 500 cards and every one was sent out. thinking he would do the same thing come fathers day, he announced he would be giving out cards again. you know how many cards he gave out?...3...what do you think that means? probably that either they don't have contact with their father, or they don't know who their father is, or they hate him. 

the link between education and crime is pretty much non existent. there is the same percentage of white collar crime as there is blue collar crime. But, there is a huge link between family units and crime. But I know that would go against every principle the left stands for and so it gets no attention.


----------



## Ender (Oct 10, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Touch'O'Death _
> *Actualy it does matter because I'm trying to figure out weather or not you are part of the problem or the solution. Part of the problem with public education is that parents sit at home and explain to the kids what idiots their teachers are and then expect their kids to do well and respect adults. If the parents don't respect anything then their kids will not either. What we seem to have here is a lot of people just chomping at the bit to dismantle public education in favor of smaller private instituions that keep their kid away from everyone else's ,good for nothing, kids. The last I checked teachers were paid less than anyother profession for the amount of education required. This is a throw back from the old school marm days when teaching is just what some young ladys did before they were married( like Miss Crabtree on little rascals). Anyways I see you trying to destroy a proffesion that for the most part has always been broke and since Robert stole the "fiddlesticks" comment I say poppycock! Public education is our nations only hope. Enforced parenting is what our kids need not a revamping of the education system by a bunch of folks such as yourself that only think they understand the problem.
> Sean *



no it doesn't because you want to label or attack me. if you can't participate in a discussion without that, then sit, watch and learn..*G


----------



## Touch Of Death (Oct 10, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Ender _
> *no it doesn't because you want to label or attack me. if you can't participate in a discussion without that, then sit, watch and learn..*G *


Oh, and calling everything that you don't like "liberal" is not name calling. What washed up actor is going to save us now Mr. Game?


----------



## Touch Of Death (Oct 10, 2003)

And would you please point out where I labled and then attacked you. I've been made curious by that paranoid remark.


----------



## pknox (Oct 10, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Ender _
> *EXACTLY!!..there's a reason why private school and home schooled students do better than the public school students. *



Could you please provide documentation of research supporting this?  I have seen plenty of fantastic public school students, and also plenty of marginal at best private school ones, so I'm not really so sure how true that is.  

As for home schooled students, how many of them get the "social education" that comes from being around people like (or even more importantly, unlike) themselves?  I personally know of one home schooled individual, who grew up in the same neighborhood I did.  He was extremely brilliant, eventually went to Harvard, where he completed an economics degree in three years (i.e. graduated 1 year early) by going to classes through summers as well.  After college, he went to law school, where he graduated near the top of his class.  Upon graduating, he got a job with a law firm, and was able to last less than a year -- the fact that he had to deal with "other people" drove him to a nervous breakdown, as well as a suicide attempt.  He is now perhaps the most highly educated person to ever bag groceries for A&P.  Sometimes the ability to get along in society with people different than yourself is just as important as academic success, and that is very hard to replicate in a home-schooled environment.


----------



## pknox (Oct 10, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Ender _
> **loading my my right wing crap cannon with the mother of all bombs....
> 
> 
> ...



And Ender, as teachers, we deal with the children who are a product of this mess everyday -- and have to deal with the lack of respect that comes from them being in this situation, and the frustration that comes from their caregivers "unlearning" everything we teach them in regards to honesty, respect, and hard work.  Do you still think that's something anyone with a bachelor's degree can handle?


----------



## Ender (Oct 10, 2003)

hehehe....ok..where to star..*G

In Calif, all you need to BECOME a teacher is to show a bachelors degree and they will issuse you "emergency credentials" and voila'..you are a teacher. or you can take the CBEST test (which is dreadfully easy). the point is, it is very easy to BECOME a teacher here. now if you become a good one thats another issue. this ease of entering the field leads to lower entrance wages.

ok next....so if i call you a liberal you would take offense???..*L..thats just silly. you can call me a conservative all day long for all i care.  You wanted to ask if my children went to a public school or where I taught to make it personal against me. Ender don't play dat!...I will tell you your opinions are wrong, screwed up or whatever, but I don't make it personal....unless or course they become idiots..*L

All the research you need to to look at SAT scores or ACT scores and correlate that data against the schools. you'll find private schools do better. now sure there are some students who do well in public school, but overall private schools do better.

one last note...Calif spends around 10K per student per year. an average of private schools cost about 5-6K, if that much. so, if there are 30 students in a class, thats 30 X 10,000 = 300,000. using one the figures one of you cite at at salary of 32k/year. where does the other 90% (approximately) go?????


----------



## RCastillo (Oct 10, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Ender _
> *teaching is a low paid profession because almost anyone can do it and teachers are plentiful. all you need is a bachelor's degree to teach up to a community college level. some teachers only need "industry experience". if the wages for teaching went up dramatically, then current teachers would be driven out of the market by better candidates.
> 
> Kobe Bryant makes alot of money because he generate alot of revenue like ticket sales, advertizing, and merchandizing. They aren't paying Kobe to just play basketball, they are paying him to generate cash, which he does. *



Well, since I'm a teacher/former coach, the Goldendragon musta put you up to this! LOL (Just teasing)

Better candidates? I'd like to see em. It ain't money, but the bull**** one puts up with.

I face:
* Students, with no manners,  no work ethic, poorly raised
* The Parents
* The sometime weak/scared administrators
*The State of Texas, that think they know what they're doing
* The District, a faceless entity who would sacrifice their own mothers, if they thought they could win, and they NEVER ADMIT THAT THEY'RE WRONG!
That last one pisses me off greatly!

I'm now waiting for a teacher to go "postal" with all the BS we gotta go through.

Many teachers themselves are so stressed, they're on meds  just to make it through the day.

I ought to know, I'm one of them.

I'm a 22 yr vet, so I can't quit, I got obligations to my family/finances, but what I have done is fight back like a Pit Bull on a chain. Now they think twice!

Now,...... I play to win, I come first above all else. I do my job always, but if ya screw with me...................:samurai:


----------



## rmcrobertson (Oct 11, 2003)

I see. You feel free to insult teachers--about whom you seem not to know very much--but it's not personal.

I realize that it's easier to attack teachers, and to pass everything off as a consequence of politics with which you disagree, than it is to deal with reality, and the way in which we are all implicated in these problems. 

However, I repeat: does anybody honestly think that teachers are any more incompetent as a group than, say military procurement officers (the DIVAD/Sgt. York; the B-2; the Bradley...the F-14) and cops (Abner Djaillou ring a bell?)...?

I guarantee you that there are no more phony teachers in public schools, and that the way public schools teach is no more phony, than is the average in martial arts.


----------



## lhommedieu (Oct 11, 2003)

Ender,

You said, *LOL...funny how people can read something and still get it wrong. I never said they overpaid and underworked. I have said they are not underpaid, and I gave proof of salaries paid here.

Funny, I never said that I was replying to _any_ of your posts, but since youve decided to engage in ad hominum argument (here and elsewhere), Ill reply directly to your statements instead.

You said, (T)eaching is a low paid profession because almost anyone can do it and teachers are plentiful.

Not true on two counts.  (1) Teaching is _not_ a low paid profession because almost anyone can do it.  If almost anyone can do it, then why do so many teachers quit?  (Probably because they can make more money doing something thats easier to do.) (2) Teachers are _not_ plentiful in many areas of the country, particularly in urban districts where salaries are lower than the suburbs.  New York City, for example, faces chronic teacher shortages every year, due partly to low salaries - among many other reasons. 

You said, "dude, keep up with the convo...I said my friend was making 62K after 5 years experience!!..and her hubby was vp at 8 years experience making over 100K. My point is that teachers are not necessarily as under paid as everyone thinks. yes , the STARTING salaries at pretty low, but they do that purposely do weed people out."

To be fair, salaries and certification requirements vary from state to state.  After *14 years* of teaching public school in New York city, I make only a little more than your friend is making.  I make approximately 30% _less_ than I would in a typical white-collar suburban neighborhood of say, Connecticut or northern New Jersey (where high property-based taxes support educational systems, that, you guessed it, are superior to the other 90% of those in the nation that have a lower property base).  To be fair, I make more than I would in say, Florida or South Dakota (where a teacher with my experience is probably making far, far less), but Im also living in one of the highest cost-of-living cities in the nation. I was also required to get a master's degree (while I was working and raising a family) to maintain my certification and keep my job.  I'd be curious to see what a  _stock broker_, or even a _school custodian_ (do either of these jobs require a B.A. or M.S.ed.?) is making after 14 years experience.  (No offense to either profession - I just think that my salary is _not_ commensurate my education.).  I also teach in a working environment thats far different than my suburban compatriots:  poorer infrastructure (supplies, resources, training), kids with greater needs (the majority are not native English speakers, or have parents that do not speak English), and greater demands on my energy and time (my class size, for example, has often been more than _double_ than that of a typical wealthy suburban school district classroom).

Given the above, I respectfully disagree that I was underpaid as a starting teacher because anyone else could have done my job.  (For that matter, if I am not underpaid now, in anyones opinion, then I am either paid just right, or overpaid.  I submit that I am neither "paid just just right," nor nor "overpaid."  With respect to whether "anyone could do [the job] then that means that _you could do it, or the panhandler down the street, or the corporate executive up the block?  If so, then the logical implications must include either that (1) the educational requirements to gain and maintain teaching certification are excessively lax, or (2) teachings a cakewalk, requiring a modicum of skill, effort, and experience.  

Re. your point of paying teachers a low starting salary to weed people out:  Uh, no...

Because teacher salaries comprise the majority of any budget for education (which is, for the most part, based on property taxes), the point is to squeeze as much out productivity out of the budget as possible (hire more new teachers for less money), while making sure that the salary for experienced teachers will always stay within a certain range (keep higher salaries down, and have less experienced teachers who make more money).  For example, I could go on to get my doctorate in education, but my salary would go up at such a small percentage, and so incrementally, that it would take me thirty years to pay off my student loans.  

This argument is actually more logical:  experienced teachers are paid lower salaries to encourage them to move on, thereby creating vacancies for lower-paid, less experienced teachers.  This flock of new teachers will no longer have as many (if any) seasoned professionals to rely on for advice and mentoring; the flight of experienced teachers from the profession is without doubt one of the main reasons for the high turnover rate among teachers just entering the field.  In my typical urban elementary school, for example, there are exactly three teachers with more than seven years experience  out of approximately 100 teachers.  I should note that nearly all of these teachers came into the system with M.A. or M.S. degrees, a (soon-to-be) entry level requirement that is not required in many professions wherein you can make far more money on an entry-level than you can in teaching.

Frankly, any assertion that private industry can do a better job increasing teacher salaries is based on merit is ludicrous.  In a private school in East St. Louis, for example, from where is the money coming? 

Finally:  Convo?  Conversation has only one o.  Do you mean convolution]?

Best,

Steve Lamade_


----------



## Cruentus (Oct 11, 2003)

Man...this has gotten good....opcorn:


----------



## Seig (Oct 12, 2003)

Ok, Here is a hard and fast figure.  I teach two college classes.  They 1 hour and 40 minutes a piece.  A semester is 16 weeks.  I do not get my first check until a month after the mid-term has concluded.  I get my second check, a week before the next semester begins.  I $660.00 per semester.   So, I teach a little over 53 hours a semester.  That does not include any of the other things I have to do, like grades or counceling.  Now, after 4 years, I have not had a raise, nor am I likely to get one nor do I receive ANY benefits, not even direct deposit.  Tsave money, the school has cut two of my classes, classes I didn't get paid for to begin with. (They still have not been able to explain that satisfactorily.)  So, on the surface, I get  $12.45 an hour.  In this area that is considered a good income.   Granted, I teach a Phys Ed course (Kenpo), but I have one of the highest failure rates in the department.  The administration has tried talking to me about it.  They only tried once.  The asked me, don't you feel you are being unduly hard?  My answer?  Look at my attendance records, the ones that actually attended class have high grades.  By all counts, I am about as conservative as a white male can get.  I do feel that there are a lot of bad teachers out there.  In retrospect, the ones I thought that were truly bad turned out to be my best teachers.  I absolutely hated teachers like Robert, I was/am diamterically opposed to their politics.  But I had to actually <<gasp>> learn to be able to argue with them articulately and accurately; especially if I wanted to *win* the argument.  Looking back, I love those teachers.  Don't get me wrong, I had teachers that didn't even bother trying to teach.  I also had teachers that taught so well that I don't remember a damn thing they said or even their names.  The issue here is so much larger a problem than simply money can solve.  A teacher can't teach if the student doesn't give a damn.  I worked in the Juvenile Detention system for a long time, I met some damned smart kids, some were also well educated.  I have harped on this before, the entire issue facing this country is accountability, or the lack thereof.  If Ricardo flunks a student for not doing their homework, not showing up to class, not paying attention, and subsequently failing his tests, how can I blame Ricardo?  I don't think I can, but I bet the student, the student's parents, and the administration all do.
To all of you *Good* teachers :asian:


----------



## RCastillo (Oct 12, 2003)

> _Originally posted by PAUL _
> *Man...this has gotten good....opcorn: *



Put plenty salt/butter in that popcorn, will ya! Oh,, and a nice cold diet coke, plastic bottle, please!:drinkbeer


----------



## rmcrobertson (Oct 12, 2003)

Seig: I don't think you actually know much about my politics, but OK.

You need a union, dude.


----------



## Ender (Oct 12, 2003)

I'm baaack!!....hmmm...nothing really good was posted to dispute me...guess I won!!..heheh..anyway, time to get to a new topic.

hmmm...what should we discuss now??


----------



## Cruentus (Oct 13, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Ender _
> *I'm baaack!!....hmmm...nothing really good was posted to dispute me...guess I won!!..heheh..anyway, time to get to a new topic.
> 
> hmmm...what should we discuss now?? *



ummm...yea...you won....sure....


----------



## Seig (Oct 13, 2003)

> _Originally posted by rmcrobertson _
> *Seig: I don't think you actually know much about my politics, but OK.
> 
> You need a union, dude. *


Fine, I pay you and your profession a compliment and I get a shot taken at me.  I'm out, have fun.


----------



## rmcrobertson (Oct 14, 2003)

What shot? Was it the, " I don't think you know much about my politics," or the, "you need a union?"

I'd be properly chastised if it were the second one--I should know better than to remind anybody from West Virginia of the necessity of unions.

I would be sorry if I offended you. I guess I get a bit knee-jerky about posting something and having some weird version of what I must be thinking in response...


----------



## Touch Of Death (Oct 14, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Ender _
> *I'm baaack!!....hmmm...nothing really good was posted to dispute me...guess I won!!..heheh..anyway, time to get to a new topic.
> 
> hmmm...what should we discuss now?? *


You were just about to point out how I labled and attacked you. Or were you talking about the imaginary attacks in the imaginary battle you just won? You will have to excuse me, but I think my Karma just ran over your dogma.
Sean:enguard:


----------

