The Incredible Efficiency of Teacher Salaries

[tzanth]

Well, the truth for both teachers and professors is that there tends to be much less of the hard, bottom-line, often unpleasant competition you see in the private workplace.

This is flat out false. Full time positions in academia are absurdly competitive. Far more so, I would argue, than the vast majority of private sector careers.

Thats not to say that it can't be a pretty pleasant job once you're in, however.

[lokisnow]

A good teacher is worth about five hundred thousand dollars to the economy a year, when considering their long range impact.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2011/01/25/133215055/the-tuesday-podcast-how-much-is-a-good-teacher-worth

edit: change million to thousand, whoops

[Swordfish]

No one is claiming that they were fooled into it, and there's a huge range of salaries in between "wealthy" and "all right for a year or two right out of college, with no responsibilities." Nobody's complaining that they're not rolling in dough; the problem is that it's barely middle-class, unless, again, you have a spouse also working full-time.

A middle class income based on 9 months of work? Plus exceptional benefits and pension?

What is the complaint again?

Because there are not a ton of jobs that provide a middle class income by themselves in nine months. Not even getting into pension and benefits and job satisfaction.....

I don't think teachers are over paid, but this constant need to somehow put them on a cross is not gonna win a lot of people over. Particularly since a lot of people live on a lot less and work just as hard.

IMO, naturally.

[Aemon Stark]

Again, why is that? Well, the truth for both teachers and professors is that there tends to be much less of the hard, bottom-line, often unpleasant competition you see in the private workplace.

I can't speak for schools, but I thought it was fairly common knowledge that academic workplace environments can be filled with awful rivalries and long term conflicts/grudges.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

I can't speak for schools, but I thought it was fairly common knowledge that academic workplace environments can be filled with awful rivalries and long term conflicts/grudges.

Sure, but they generally don't cost you your job to the extent it occurs in private companies that are under no restriction from firing people the second they get out of line.

[tzanth]

Sure, but they generally don't cost you your job to the extent it occurs in private companies that are under no restriction from firing people the second they get out of line.

Nonsense. It happens all the time. Not everyone has tenure, you know.

[Guest Raids]

Getting tenure is pretty much like making partner.

[Aemon Stark]

Sure, but they generally don't cost you your job to the extent it occurs in private companies that are under no restriction from firing people the second they get out of line.

Tell that to the ever-growing ranks of contract lecturers without permanent positions.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

Tell that to the ever-growing ranks of contract lecturers without permanent positions.

There are plenty of private employees who don't have any position at all. The turnover in the public sector still isn't close to what you see in private industry.

[Lord of Oop North]

Long-time rivalries and inter-office grudges? Um ... welcome to the working world?

[tzanth]

There are plenty of private employees who don't have any position at all. The turnover in the public sector still isn't close to what you see in private industry.

What about the legions of graduate students who are "employed" for 5-10 years of their lives with a minuscule chance of said employment ever landing them a real job?

The system is very different, but id be surprised if the overall turnover is all that different.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

What about the legions of graduate students who are "employed" for 5-10 years of their lives with a minuscule chance of said employment ever landing them a real job?

The system is very different, but id be surprised if the overall turnover is all that different.

I was referring to professors, not wannabe professors. I don't mean that disparagingly, but it points out the incredible number of people trying to get into that profession. And why would they be doing that for the relatively low pay if there weren't significant non-economic benefits to being a professor? The problem for grad students is that there isn't enough turnover among the professors themselves.

[tzanth]

I was referring to professors, not wannabe professors. I don't mean that disparagingly, but it points out the incredible number of people trying to get into that profession. And why would they be doing that for the relatively low pay if there weren't significant non-economic benefits to being a professor? The problem for grad students is that there isn't enough turnover among the professors themselves.

You have to look at them though, otherwise the comparison doesn't work. It's like trying to study a law firm by only looking at the associates and excluding all the clerks and paralegals. Considering it takes 8 or so years to finish, graduate school IS part of the career track of professional academic, and the turnover is huge.

I fully agree that there are non-economic benefits for being a professor, but thats not we are discussing here. This thread has generally been about economic factors such as job security, turnover rates, time off, etc. Which I maintain are very comparable between private sector careers and those in academica.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

You have to look at them though, otherwise the comparison doesn't work. It's like trying to study a law firm by only looking at the associates and excluding all the clerks and paralegals. Considering it takes 8 or so years to finish, graduate school IS part of the career track of professional academic, and the turnover is huge.

That's true, but this thread was about public school teachers, and professors are only relevant as a throw-in because of the similarity of tenure as a form of non-economic compensation. If you just want to go back to plain old teachers, then we can leave out the grad students.

I fully agree that there are non-economic benefits for being a professor, but thats not we are discussing here. This thread has generally been about economic factors such as job security, turnover rates, time off, etc. Which I maintain are very comparable between private sector careers and those in academica.

But I don't think you can properly discuss whether someone is "underpaid" or "overpaid" without looking at non-economic factor because that's what workers themselves look at in consider jobs. People don't get paid $20 an hour to pick up garbage because it's a hard job for which to qualify, but because it's a nasty job to do. Good attorneys will choose to be prosecutors instead of making more money in private practice because the job is perceived as more rewarding and interesting.

[Jaime L]

Was thinking one of the super sweet benefits to being a teacher is the existence of substitute teachers. I went to one of the best public schools in my county, the kind of place that would attract some of the most dedicated and demanding teachers. But even there the amount of time many of them missed, it's kinda amazing in retrospect. I'd see some of these substitute teachers 15-20 times for a specific class. I don't even hold it against those teachers...if there was a substitute "me" I assuredly would've made use of him last week after getting sick and feeling like I'd been hit by a bus. But the ramifications would've been too intense, I had deadlines to meet and the expectations set (among both coworkers and clients) so I worked the standard 6 day week for this time of year. But man, the whole time I was thinking how frustrated I was that there is no mechanism for me to realistically take a sick day.

Also recall a professor I had at the business school at Indiana who I think actually attended a total of 9 out of the 18 class sessions he was supposed to teach that semester. The rest of the time he was out sick. He's definitely an outlier...but just the fact that he could. I marvel.

The other benefit that comes to mind is snow days. My school district growing up would cancel at, literally, 2 inches of snow or 1/4th inch of ice whichever comes first. Apparently school buses became fireball death traps at that level of snow. We missed so much time they had to abridge cirriculums - but it's still the fact they can. There was no set amount of work that had to be done...that was adjustable. Now if we get enough snow to miss work...it just means there's hell to pay the next day because that work doesn't get done. Not such a fan of snow days like I was as a kid...

[Dinsdale!]

I was referring to professors, not wannabe professors. I don't mean that disparagingly, but it points out the incredible number of people trying to get into that profession. And why would they be doing that for the relatively low pay if there weren't significant non-economic benefits to being a professor? The problem for grad students is that there isn't enough turnover among the professors themselves.

Was!!? By the time an aspiring young Physicist is applying for faculty jobs, he typically has 8-11 years of experience working in science. 5-7 years as a graduate student and 2-4 years as a Post-Doc. A graduate student in a research field is nothing like graduate school in one of the professions. Don't let the word "student" fool. There's little of studying in grad school and a lot of working 60 hrs/week.

[Guy Kilmore]

I'm still making up my mind on the effects of teacher's unions on education. I was formerly of the opinion that they were one of the major sources of the poor educational system in the U.S., but I read articles that raised the points I mentioned above, amongst other points, and now I'm not sure. I posted full versions in the previous Wisconsin thread - one is in Slate and it's about Michelle Rhee.

My pet theory is administrative costs. When you look at schools in other industrialized nations and then compare them to hear an insane amount of the school's budget goes to pay upper administration, more so than other places. (At least when I saw some of the data points a couple of years ago.) Upper Administration also has its own union, this is where I think the American Education System went sideways.

The other factor is that some view the schooling system as the state's method to intervene with bad parenting, or those parents who are low on income. School's attempt to provide wrap around services to deal with those social issues, which, frankly, costs a lot of money.

ETA: Flow, just to make sure I read something correctly, you are positing that teachers don't stand on their feet all day? Really? I am in and out of classrooms all the time and I rarely see a teacher sitting down. Also, I know a lot of teachers that have to deal with behavioral problems that most of us avoid on a daily basis.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

Was!!? By the time an aspiring young Physicist is applying for faculty jobs, he typically has 8-11 years of experience working in science. 5-7 years as a graduate student and 2-4 years as a Post-Doc. A graduate student in a research field is nothing like graduate school in one of the professions. Don't let the word "student" fool. There's little of studying in grad school and a lot of working 60 hrs/week.

So? Grad students aren't comparable to public school teachers, whose compensation is what this thread is about. Professors are to some extent. I made the point previously that the relative glut of people seeking most teaching positions is indicative of a profession that is not underpaid when economic and non-economic factors are considered. The glut of grad students seeking professorships suggests that professors are not underpaid either.

The best way to determine if an occupation is "underpaid" is to look at how difficult it is to fill available slots, because people aren't going to flock to jobs where the compensation isn't worth the headaches.

[Liadin]

A middle class income based on 9 months of work? Plus exceptional benefits and pension?

What is the complaint again?

Because there are not a ton of jobs that provide a middle class income by themselves in nine months. Not even getting into pension and benefits and job satisfaction.....

Teachers don't exactly have the choice of working extra during the summer to earn an extra $10,000 or so. My understanding is that many of them do teach summer school, do continuing ed classes, etc.--don't know the statistics on how many do it or the details of compensation, but it's not like that automatically bumps it up to a decent salary. (And not everybody has a 3-month vacation.)

It's also important to point out that while there are enough people interested in teaching to fill the positions, we'd have better teachers if they were better paid. For a lot of talented people, the salary isn't worth the headaches, and I'm sure we all had our fair share of useless teachers in grade school as a result. Yes, accountability is a serious problem, but the better the applicant pool is to begin with, the more selective districts can be.

[tzanth]

So? Grad students aren't comparable to public school teachers, whose compensation is what this thread is about. Professors are to some extent. I made the point previously that the relative glut of people seeking most teaching positions is indicative of a profession that is not underpaid when economic and non-economic factors are considered. The glut of grad students seeking professorships suggests that professors are not underpaid either.

The best way to determine if an occupation is "underpaid" is to look at how difficult it is to fill available slots, because people aren't going to flock to jobs where the compensation isn't worth the headaches.

I don't think the discussion of professors really bares any light on the situation with teachers. Not only are they completely unrelated jobs, but the ways in which people get into them are very different.

Teachers are probably much more comparable to the private sector. People come and go from teaching jobs. Academia is more of a lifestyle choice. People don't really flock "to" jobs in academia so much as they are flocked "into" a path which may someday lead to the possibility of having a job.