mella;503741 wrote:I think that there might be something to not putting the burden on the taxpayer. I bet most parents would not mind paying about $3,000 a year per kid (approximate amount at St. Michaels in Dublin, OH) k-8 and about $7,000 per year per kid for 9-12 (St. Charles Prep, Columbus OH). This way parents can pay for the education they want for their kids, the taxpayer no longer foots the bill, and schools can competively compete to attract the best teachers. This would also allow schools to selectively admit students and take care of the problem student issue.

Families that can't afford to send their kids to schools can home school, without state provided curriculum and support, of course.

All sports would be pay to participate and these would cost extra, same as music, drama, etc... Extra tutoring time could be paid for out of pocket as needed.
Individual schools could teach what they deemed important and not be under the gun to teach a state or national curriculum.

This eliminates the "animosity" that might exist on both sides of the teacher pay issue. I think teachers get paid about right as it is.

LJ;503565 wrote:and the regular working person does that while working 40+ hours per week 50 weeks per year

thedynasty1998;503514 wrote:Did a teacher really get on here and try to claim that they only get one month off over the summer? Give me a break.

And then they complain that they have to stay a couple hours after school, guess what, the rest of the world works until 5 or 6 anyways.

People have made good arguments on here justifying pay, but when a teacher comes on here and makes the statements they did, it really makes them look foolish.

fan_from_texas;503518 wrote:Or 7 . . . or 8 . . . or 9. Teachers usually respond to this line of argument by saying, "But we have to grade papers in the evening, too!" I don't think the issue is that people don't understand how many hours teachers work; I think it tends to be that teachers don't understand how many hours the rest of us work.

redfalcon;503618 wrote:You see, this is why I am getting annoyed. Yes, I get two weeks off for Christmas, but the district over from me only gets a week. My district does not have a spring break.

People are assuming that all of the school districts in the world do the same thing as their local district or the one they went to school at.

Otherwise you are just restating what I have already said. Yes, we get more time off, but it is often not nearly as much as most people would like to think.

Ernest said it best.

If you are so jealous, then quit your job and come get a teaching job.

ernest_t_bass;517176 wrote:For those that pass, they are re-evaluated every 5 years. One cannot receive tenure until after at least 15 years of teaching. What say you?

Y-Town Steelhound;517309 wrote:If you have bad teachers, you're going to have an ignorant country. If anything, I think we should pay teachers more to encourage more qualified and better teachers (mostly in the math and science fields where there is more money to be had then just teaching).

georgemc80;517287 wrote:Ok, as a teacher with 12 years experience and 6 years of "real world" business..here is my opinion.

1. My salary is more than adequate. Nobody lied to me during college about my salary. Yes, my first job was 17,500 a year, but I am now at 50K.
2. If my salary is not enough there are at least another 100 days a year I could work a second job.
3. Knowing my salary expectations, I knew I couldn't marry any of the cute girls in education classes. Which is why I took an intro to business class and found a spouse there.
4. During the summer I: Watch two movies a week with my kids, read about 30 books, attend two weeks of training(paid for by district), hang out by the pool, and usually spend a week on a cruise vacation, I also go to my summer home in Belize for a couple weeks..(its where I will retire).


I don't know if I am a good teacher, but all my evaluations (adminstrator and parent)say that I am. You cannot compare me to anyone else, even in my school. I teach AP US History to sons and daughters of NASA engineers and the Drs. of the Houston Medical Center. Of course my state test scores are always 100%...its not fair to compare my scores to teachers who teach general ed students. If you want to compare me to other AP teachers, my AP scores are very good. But I do have excellent students that are motivated. So thats not fair a fair way to compare.

Basically, teachers are paid fairly. Its the job I want to do, and I do it to the best of my ability. Not everyone can teach. I generally don't judge other careers, but for some reason, an inordinate amount of people know all about my career.

thedynasty1998;517374 wrote: 2. I absolutely think that a HS math teacher should get paid significantly more than a HS gym or history teacher.

ernest_t_bass;517176 wrote:How about this?

Teacher has two years to "show what they got." In that first two year, they are paid dirt (like most of you feel teachers should be). After those two years, they are bumped up to a more respectable pay. They are put on a (let's say) 5 year period of this respectable pay. In order to get to the next "bump," or increase, in pay, they need to complete another set of evaluations, done by professionals. Again, if they pass, they are paid more.

If they don't pass, they are paid the same, and will be re-evaluated in 2 years. If they fail again after those two years, it moves to a one year probationary period. Fail again, bye-bye.

For those that pass, they are re-evaluated every 5 years. One cannot receive tenure until after at least 15 years of teaching. What say you?

ernest_t_bass;517392 wrote:You do realize that the History teacher is more than likely teaching Government and Economics, right?

fan_from_texas;517394 wrote:But generally, if you're a teacher who thinks you're better than average, why would you be opposed to a system that would pay you more?

thedynasty1998;517399 wrote:Econ was taught by our business teacher.

And yes, I don't think government teachers should be paid equally as Math and Science.

ernest_t_bass;517402 wrote:What if the football coach is a terrible teacher (I'm talking TURRIBLE, especially during FB season) but the kids, parents, and community LOVE him! People are not going to get rid of him based on your "system."

thedynasty1998;517410 wrote:The extracurriculars that a teacher is involved with can be factored into their performance.

ernest_t_bass;517411 wrote:That is retarded. You just stated that it is "OK" to be a piss-poor teacher, as long as you are a good coach?

ernest_t_bass;517411 wrote:That is retarded. You just stated that it is "OK" to be a piss-poor teacher, as long as you are a good coach?

thedynasty1998;517414 wrote:That's not what I'm saying. I don't think that being a coach cancels out being a poor teacher, but maybe an average teacher that is involved in extracurriculars has more value than a slightly better teacher who is home at 3:30 every day.

A good coach can teach more on a field than a great teacher can in a classroom.

Pick6;517511 wrote:The only teaching jobs ive ever heard of head football coaches having are PE, health, and art. Those aren't necessarily hard classes to teach

ernest_t_bass;517531 wrote:So, you are de-valuing that content. You don't think, especially with our national obesity problem, that Health and PE are important classes? You don't think that teaching a respect for life-long fitness is important? How about an appreciation for the arts? Art is what spurs the imagination in most children, so is it something we want to de-value?

I'm more-or-less just trying to play devil's advocate here.