Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And more evidence that of what is seen as professionalism in teachers is different from other fields.
I think I'll just have to disagree with you and leave it at that.
I don't like to pay teachers less or treat them with less respect than other professions. I also don't particularly like to hold them to higher standards than other professions. Teaching is a profession, in my opinion, like any other. Nothing more nor less.
I think I'll just have to disagree with you and leave it at that.
I don't like to pay teachers less or treat them with less respect than other professions. I also don't particularly like to hold them to higher standards than other professions. Teaching is a profession, in my opinion, like any other. Nothing more nor less.
I'm not being clear.
I totally accept that you don't see it that way.
I'm saying not only that I do (which the part where we disagree, as previously noted), but that society expects/demands better behavior from teachers than from society in general.
The behavior mentioned is an illustration of that. It is not, as Ivory has very adroitly pointed out, the kind of behavior you would see in engineering or with auto mechanics or physicians.
I'm saying not only that I do (which the part where we disagree, as previously noted), but that society expects/demands better behavior from teachers than from society in general.
The behavior mentioned is an illustration of that. It is not, as Ivory has very adroitly pointed out, the kind of behavior you would see in engineering or with auto mechanics or physicians.
Just with teachers. The difference exists.
The difference shouldn't exist. There is no reason for it. ... Actually, there is. It exists to guilt teachers into staying in spite of dismal conditions. It's archaic. The teacher's union has taken care of those conditions (including pay) for union teachers. Some of us still work for pre union wages in pre union conditions. Guilt is what they hope will hold us to our jobs.
The first day of school is Monday. I don't have books. I planned my lessons around the text we were supposed to get. Now I'm not getting it. So, I get to teach a brand new class with no text. I don't have supplies for my classroom. Had to make a run to Staples for things like white board markers and staples.
Guilt is the way administrators keep teachers they treat badly from leaving. Look at the history of the profession. If you don't pay people and you expect them to supply their own resources in spite of not being paid (and buying resources does not allow you to make more money like it does for someone like a mechanic so don't bring up tools for other trades), how do you hold them in their jobs? How do you keep them from giving up? You treat them like they're something higher than everyone else and guilt them into doing what you want.
Teachers aren't supposed to desire fair pay. They're somehow sainted and called to a higher standard. If you can convince them of that, you don't have to pay them higher pay to get them to stay. You're buying into what they are selling.
There is NOTHING wrong with expecting fair compensation. And NOTHING wrong with leaving one job where it's not provide to take one where it is.
Personally, I wouldn't leave a position where I was fairly compensated for a better one but that's my choice. As I've said before, I like roots. Roots mean more to me than highe pay. As an engineer, I only earned about 80% of what I could have on the open market because I liked my roots. It took me a long time to decide that I needed to do something different. If it were up to me, I'd settle in for the long haul.
I will, however, leave a position where I am not fairly compensated and where I am not given the supplies I need to do my job for one where I am fairly compensated even if they don't supply what I need. If I have fair compensation, I really don't mind running to Staples or ordering my own teachers resources kits.
Did I miss your answer to my question of whether or not YOU are fairly compensated? Or did you avoid it?
And more evidence that of what is seen as professionalism in teachers is different from other fields.
I think teachers should be allowed to leave and find provisions sanctioning them for leaving to be wrong. If you look at the calendar when school districts hire and when teachers need to resign by you find little overlap. It makes it very difficult for teachers to change districts and can leave them trapped in school districts they hate. People need to ask if their state or district has a resignation by date that is prior to the start of the school year and how much prior? Is a July 15 date reasonable for tenured teachers? How about spring date for non tenured teachers? Being non tenured and wanting to leave in some states can make you feel like and indentured servant. The acid test is in what is the actual date you need to resign by.
I think teachers should be allowed to leave and find provisions sanctioning them for leaving to be wrong. If you look at the calendar when school districts hire and when teachers need to resign by you find little overlap. It makes it very difficult for teachers to change districts and can leave them trapped in school districts they hate. People need to ask if their state or district has a resignation by date that is prior to the start of the school year and how much prior? Is a July 15 date reasonable for tenured teachers? How about spring date for non tenured teachers? Being non tenured and wanting to leave in some states can make you feel like and indentured servant. The acid test is in what is the actual date you need to resign by.
The problem is the date you need to resign by is the one someone else is hiring you by. You just don't have a choice but to keep the job you have until you actually have another one. That's how it is in just about every other profession. No one expects you to quit before you actually have another job. Here, schools hire in May and again in September after numbers are firmed up. Requiring teachers to give notice in the spring or summer if they want to seek employment in September means they risk unemployment for the year. That is an unreasonable thing to request, especially, since the school district they are leaving has the same option to hire someone else when a teacher leaves. I can't think of another profession where it's a requirement to quit before you have another job. Why should teachers be any different than any other professional?
Yes, a teacher leaving causes a disruption. So does a day care provider leaving or a doctor leaving long term patients or the owner of the local party store retiring for that matter (The retirement of the local party store owner had more impact on me than losing any teacher did. He was a fixture in neighborhood for many years.) Just because teachers can time leaving so that the disruption is minimal doesn't mean they are to be held to doing so. A teacher should not be required to pass on a better opportunity just because it came on the wrong day of the year. In any other profession, this would be an unthinkable requirement. The day they limit when schools can hire is the day they have the right to limit when teachers leave. If all schools were required to do their hiring by July 15th, then all teachers would give their notice by July 15th. Of course people will argue that schools have the right to hire when they have need to hire and not be limited as to when they can do so. If that applies to schools, it applies to teachers too.
I find it sad that schools will try to use coersion and guilting to keep teachers. Far simpler to just give them decent pay and decent working conditions but, apparently, that's an unreasonable request.
Last edited by Ivorytickler; 09-04-2009 at 07:39 AM..
Let me reiterate, again: you are ignoring your own words. So, let me play them back for you:
I didn't write that. You did. You have one foot out the door, emotionally.
This is not "I have to have something left for my family," though you keep trying to paint it that way.
This is "I (Ivory) am unwilling to commit as much of myself to these students, because I am planning to leave them. They do not get my best teaching."
Exactly. There's a difference between just mailing it in, and making your family a priority-- though the latter makes a dandy excuse when you're doing the former.
You are twisiting my need for a livable wage into greed when it's not.
Okay, here's my observation:
The lowest paid teachers in this state (BA level, FAMU Lab School) make roughly 35K. Yeah, that's a pretty low wage (and about 12K below the average teacher's wage, not to mention Florida has traditionally offered far less compensation to workers than Northern states). OTOH, when you figure in the other adult in the household-- particularly when you figure in another adult with a non-teaching job-- that income at least doubles, and probably runs more in (at least) the 75-100K range. Possibly more.
Now, personally, I don't know too many people who need more than 75-100K a year to live on. I know a lot of people who have that, and plenty who want more than that, but there's a whole huge difference between "I want more" and "I can't afford to live on this".
The lowest paid teachers in this state (BA level, FAMU Lab School) make roughly 35K. Yeah, that's a pretty low wage (and about 12K below the average teacher's wage, not to mention Florida has traditionally offered far less compensation to workers than Northern states). OTOH, when you figure in the other adult in the household-- particularly when you figure in another adult with a non-teaching job-- that income at least doubles, and probably runs more in (at least) the 75-100K range. Possibly more.
Now, personally, I don't know too many people who need more than 75-100K a year to live on. I know a lot of people who have that, and plenty who want more than that, but there's a whole huge difference between "I want more" and "I can't afford to live on this".
I was going to write about how COL is dependent on location and how how much you need to live off of depends on things like how good your benefits are (for example I have no pension and very expensive and lousy insurance) but I think I'll just ask why you think it's ok to pay teachers less because there's another adult in the house to make up the difference? This is the kind of logic they used in the 50's to keep teacher's wages low.
It doesn't matter what my husaband makes. I deserve fair wages. Why would I deserve less if he makes more? In our case, it happens that neither of us has a pension through our current employer so one consideration is saving enough to fully fund retirement. Another is very expensive insurance premiums and high prescription bills. You can't just pull out a number and say this is ok. You have to look at the whole picture.
Exactly. There's a difference between just mailing it in, and making your family a priority-- though the latter makes a dandy excuse when you're doing the former.
Part of making your family a priority is earning enough to care for them. Which is what this is all about.
Getting into a discussion about what teachers should be paid seems to be veering off from the original topic. Everyone knows, or should know, what teachers make before they go into the profession. In general teaching does pay a decent, middle-class salary and benefits. Obviously some of the charter schools and private schools aren't doing so; in that case we should stop lumping all schools into the same categories. Maybe parents should know that if they choose a charter or the wrong private school that they are risking a higher turnover of teachers because the schools are shortchanging the teachers.
It sounds like the real issue here, to me, anyway, is not whether or not it's ethical for a teacher to leave midway through the year (in normal circumstances I don't think it is) but whether or not school hiring practices need to modified to make it easier for teachers to have the ability to move from one school to another during non-disruptive times. It soundsl ike that's the big question, and something that is perhaps more realistic to think could possibly be changed than higher salaries for some teachers.
In my education-related field one issue that my colleagues and I sometimes struggle with: if we accept a low-paying job just to have a job, any job, in the field does that mean we are enabling the profession to continue to exploit workers? That's another issue, too, but it sounds like for teachers like Ivory (and those in other schools that pay non-union wages and no benefits) might have to struggle with, too. It's not an easy question.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
