The Incredible Efficiency of Teacher Salaries

[Masonity]

Comparing a teacher to a babysitter, then breaking down per child is inherently wrong. When I was a teenager, I babysat a few times. I charged the same for one or two children, as it was my time I was renting out. There was still only one of me there. A teacher teaching 10 kids and a teacher teaching 40 kids should, given equal experience, competence and location, earn the same amount.

As a UK member, one applying for teacher training right now, the situation here is fine. Teachers are not under paid.

A teacher in the UK makes above the average wage in their first year. Their pay goes up every year until it reaches the top of the normal pay scale, then they start moving onto different scales for experienced teachers, teachers with more responsibilities and stuff like that.

As for non economical benefits, as an economist I take umbrage with that notion. All benefits are economical. Economics is about exchanging both tangible and non-tangible goods in the pursuit of maximum utility (read: Happiness). The 12+ weeks paid holiday I'd get as a teacher are part of the pay. They are an economical benefit. As is the job security. And the fact that I'm working with kids, and all the rewards that can bring.

You also have to remember that teaching makes it easier to not have a full time stay at home parent, as soon as the kids hit school age. One parent to always finish at the same time of day as the kids (even if they have to take work home that way), to be off work for all school holidays? The other partner can easily go out and work full time when the youngest hits 5.

At the moment, our longer term plan is when the youngest goes to school, I should be already qualified and working as a teacher, my fiancée (will be wife by then) will start teacher training.

Two teacher salaries will leave us in the enviable position of being a couple that are both working full time, earning a good wage, with a fair, set salary raise path and AWESOME job security, that still allows us to spend plenty of time with our kids. And with careers that are easily transferable overseas, across the country, or wherever. Careers that won't be phased out over the next few decades, or outsourced, replaced by machines or any other such problem tons of roles will face.

edit: If you use your irrelevant "per kid" method, you also have to account for the fact that (at least in the school I was in) there are a couple of teaching assistants in each class too. And that was in a class of 20. So each teacher probably averaged 7 children a day.

Based on 7 children a day, working 5.5 hours a day with the kids, 5 days a week 39 weeks a year, that's 7,315 child hours a year. On £5 an hour (about what you'd give a babysitter) that's £36,000 a year.

In 2008, the average teacher in the uk was reported to be on £34,000.

The figures aren't SO far apart even there!

Of course, that was a small school. But then, secondary school teachers in particular quite often end up with free periods in the day (while still on full pay), so I wouldn't be too surprised to see that a 7000 child hour a year average was about right across the whole of teaching, even if some end up with much higher workloads.

[Iskaral Pust]

Your gonna have to clarify what Freakonomics apparently shows about how to effectively evaluate teacher performance.

Copyright forbids excessive detail, but I think Leavitt would permit an overview since he probably included it in the blog at some point.

Leavitt collected details of test scores in the Chicago public school system over several years. He identified trends on rate of academic progress over time. The scoring system is normalized relative to age/grade so it permits relative trends. Although there is lots of potential for variation among individuals over time, the data could clearly identify situations where an entire class of kids progressed relatively and significantly less in one year than they did in the other years. Moreover it could be seen that other classes of kids also temporarily slowed in progression when they had that same teacher. From this, you could quickly identify ineffective teachers even allowing for idiosyncrasies that usually taint analysis: individual ability, background, etc. of the kids. The data showed clear breaks in otherwise reasonably consistent trends of relative progression, whether for low-scoring or high-scoring students or classes.

Leavitt's conclusion was that if you just fire these clearly consistently under-performing teachers (~10% if I remember correctly) you would significantly improve the teacher pool. And you can similarly identify the strongest performing teachers with consistent relative out-performance and reward them appropriately and also try to disseminate their teaching practices. Then you repeat the exercise again and again until you no longer have any clear under-performers, you just have a population of average* and great teachers.

*No longer statistically average in the new population, but they were the middle of the bell-curve at the outset.

I have described that from memory, so E&OE.

The greatest frustration is that this analysis would be easy to replicate for any other large school district but difficult to act upon.

[Kosciuszko]

Sort of off-topic but somewhat related to the subject of teacher's and the benefits they receive.

I'm in undergrad right now, don't find it particularly challenging to maintain my 3.9 (4.0 in my field of study). My professors all like me, I'm on first name basis with most of them, and I apparently have a reputation around here as one of the smarter of the bunch.

I've been seriously considering, with the way the economy has been crashing lately, going the path of teaching. I enjoy the tutoring I've done for other people, helping my nephews with things, I enjoy essentially giving lectures when I have to present stuff. I think it might be a good fit.

On the other hand I also want to try to break into academia. I'm not sure how feasible this is or even how to go about it. So its more of an empty dream, something I cannot really be sure of at all or even which field of study I'd want to be in (anthropology probably interests me the most; history is my current major). Most of my history professors, when I suggest I might want to teach, tell me horror stories relating to teaching and comments such as "Teaching isn't about what you know."

What I've been considering doing is basically teaching while trying to go to grad school, to see the level of the latter and how much I enjoy the former. How feasible is this idea, in general (seeing as the group we have assembled in this thread has experience and/or knowledge of each)?

[Guest Raids]

Fair use, Isk, please. How do you think the Lit forum exists?

[Kat]

What I've been considering doing is basically teaching while trying to go to grad school, to see the level of the latter and how much I enjoy the former. How feasible is this idea, in general (seeing as the group we have assembled in this thread has experience and/or knowledge of each)?

It's not really feasible. Your schedule will conflict and both will want you to schedule your time around them as if that's your only commitment. If you really want to do both, see if you can find a grad program that has a partnership with a school, schedule volunteer time with a teacher, or work as a tutor. Unless you're gifted with being in two places at once, you'll do someone a disservice trying to do both. And substitute teaching, by the way, won't give you a very good idea of what it's like being a teacher because you won't have time to earn the respect of your students at all; they'll likely figure out how to take advantage of you and you'll just deal with a greater pain:gain ratio than you would if you had your own classroom.

I don't think I'm going to participate in this thread anymore. The level of disrespect that some boarders have for anyone who chooses to go into the teaching profession is frankly depressing. And you wonder why any public sector employees have the urge to unionize?

(The lack of any knowledge of what teachers have to do during the course of their day, and to stay in the career, is generally pretty low here. You don't just go into autopilot once you have your curriculum and teaching style worked out, and you are certainly on your feet a lot. I'm not saying this is a bad thing. I like constant stimulation in my work environment, but a lot of people find it exhausting when you have very few periods of time at work when you can just sit down and work on something for a while.)

[Guest Raids]

Well, some teachers do go on autopilot. I definitely had some. But many do not.

[H von T]

Nonetheless, I don't think I was over-reaching to suggest that most white-collar public sector employees tend to be noticeably unfit for competition in the private sector. As you say yourself, teachers tend to end up there because they are not cut out to do anything else. Should they really expect to make bank?

I'm a white-collar public sector employee and I respectfully disagree. Twenty years ago I made the unfortunate decision to make a career of selling books for a living and did not forsee the rise of the internet. Five years ago I went back to school and worked towards a degree in accounting. I had hoped to enter public accounting, but 40 year old geezers are not their target demographic. So I got a job working for the state government as a tax auditor.

My co-workers have very similar stories to mine. Many are also on second careers or entered the workforce late after having kids. Do we have some dead weight in the office? Sure, but not as much as stereotypes would suggest. Out of the 55 or so people in my office only 2 or 3 are marginal. When I first started I was amazed at how lean and efficient the department I work for is. I can also say without a doubt that our office environment is much more professional than many of the CPA/accounting offices we work with on a regular basis.

We may be members of public sector unions (against the wishes of the majority of my office btw), but we're not "noticeably unfit" to work elsewhere.

[Kosciuszko]

It's not really feasible. Your schedule will conflict and both will want you to schedule your time around them as if that's your only commitment. If you really want to do both, see if you can find a grad program that has a partnership with a school, schedule volunteer time with a teacher, or work as a tutor. Unless you're gifted with being in two places at once, you'll do someone a disservice trying to do both. And substitute teaching, by the way, won't give you a very good idea of what it's like being a teacher because you won't have time to earn the respect of your students at all; they'll likely figure out how to take advantage of you and you'll just deal with a greater pain:gain ratio than you would if you had your own classroom.

I don't think I'm going to participate in this thread anymore. The level of disrespect that some boarders have for anyone who chooses to go into the teaching profession is frankly depressing. And you wonder why any public sector employees have the urge to unionize?

Yeah, I figured as much. Plan 2 is either outright teach for a year or two and then do grad school (though that will screw me with debt, potentially) or try volunteering like you said.

And who knows, I may get my MA and decide that I really, really don't like the experience and just go teach.

Thanks for the prompt reply.

[Guest Raids]

Now I'm confused again. I thought white collar public sector employees were overpaid compared to their private counterparts, but now I'm hearing that I couldn't hack it in the (ostensibly better) private sector again. If you guys could hold a self-aggrandizing blowhard conservative convention and straighten this shit out, I'd be much obliged.

[Dinsdale!]

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.

You don't seem to grasp what I'm objecting to. This snippet:

but it points out the incredible number of people trying to get into that profession

Particularly pay attention to that last word you used. That's insulting to everybody who works as a scientist who is not a professor. Which is most scientists. Is somebody working at Sandia National Laboratories not in the science profession?

[Shryke]

Now I'm confused again. I thought white collar public sector employees were overpaid compared to their private counterparts, but now I'm hearing that I couldn't hack it in the (ostensibly better) private sector again. If you guys could hold a self-aggrandizing blowhard conservative convention and straighten this shit out, I'd be much obliged.

No, don't you see Raids. You are too weak and stupid to be able to get a real job in the private sector, so you hide out in the public sector where your union uses it's awesome powers of publicsectorness to steal money from honest, down to earth, hardworking private sectorians to pay for the lavish and idolent lifestyle you and your fellow scrubs live off the backs of tax payers.

[Guest Raids]

Gosh, I think I read about that in Atlas Shrugged!

[Kosciuszko]

Gosh, I think I read about that in Atlas Shrugged!

Are you sure you're not thinking of Soul of the Fire?

[Masonity]

Are you sure you're not thinking of Soul of the Fire?

Isn't it the same thing, but with better sex scenes?

[Kosciuszko]

Isn't it the same thing, but with better sex scenes?

Don't forget a sympathetic portrayal of not-Al Gore. Oh, and a hilarious caricature of the Clintons. Ahhhh... the 90s and Goodkind.

[Masonity]

Don't forget a sympathetic portrayal of not-Al Gore. Oh, and a hilarious caricature of the Clintons. Ahhhh... the 90s and Goodkind.

I still have his new "not sword of truth, not fantasy" book, which is of course sword of truth fantasy. Haven't started it yet, but I bought it a couple of years ago when a local book shop went bankrupt. 50p, along with a ton of other books I haven't read.

One day, I will. Because, well, I finished the Sword of Truth series. Even after I realised how terrible it was.

[Kosciuszko]

I still have his new "not sword of truth, not fantasy" book, which is of course sword of truth fantasy. Haven't started it yet, but I bought it a couple of years ago when a local book shop went bankrupt. 50p, along with a ton of other books I haven't read.

One day, I will. Because, well, I finished the Sword of Truth series. Even after I realised how terrible it was.

:bowdown:

I stopped a hundred pages into Faith of the Fallen, unable to take it anymore. I stumbled into the series believing that, well, it would be like WoT in a good way (based on just random comments I'd heard). Well. It was like WoT, I found out. But not in a good way. Didn't even find these forums until I'd quit the books for a year or two. Makes me very happy to see the Goodkind bashing.

[MinDonner]

I don't think I'm going to participate in this thread anymore. The level of disrespect that some boarders have for anyone who chooses to go into the teaching profession is frankly depressing. And you wonder why any public sector employees have the urge to unionize?

(The lack of any knowledge of what teachers have to do during the course of their day, and to stay in the career, is generally pretty low here. You don't just go into autopilot once you have your curriculum and teaching style worked out, and you are certainly on your feet a lot. I'm not saying this is a bad thing. I like constant stimulation in my work environment, but a lot of people find it exhausting when you have very few periods of time at work when you can just sit down and work on something for a while.)

All of this. I've been through this thread clicking Multiquote over and over but in the end I just can't be bothered; the amount of contempt for teachers and misapprehensions of the profession is just disgusting. Would we have a thread about lawyers where people felt it OK to go "So I met this lawyer once who was incompetent therefore the whole lot of them are unscrupulous sharks who charge by the minute just for looking things up in a book"? Fuck no.

Teaching is hard, skilled work. Anyone who says otherwise ("because once I had this teacher who didn't seem to be doing very much") is talking right out of their arse.

[Masonity]

I thought it was pretty much accepted that lawyers are unscrupulous sharks. The ones here are simply our unscrupulous sharks!

And it's funny, but on the web there's a bad teacher stereotype. Especially for male primary school teachers. Yet whenever I mention to anyone in person that I'm looking to go into it, and this includes people who are racist, homophobic and generally uncultured (working in a bar I still have to tolerate them!) I actually get a really good reaction.

The only person who told me that it's crap, to avoid it, i'd be unhappy, it's not a worthy job, etc... Is a teaching assistant I know who was a playground monitor when I was in primary school. But I think with her it's just years of bitterness built up.

[Lady Luffa]

All of this. I've been through this thread clicking Multiquote over and over but in the end I just can't be bothered; the amount of contempt for teachers and misapprehensions of the profession is just disgusting. Would we have a thread about lawyers where people felt it OK to go "So I met this lawyer once who was incompetent therefore the whole lot of them are unscrupulous sharks who charge by the minute just for looking things up in a book"? Fuck no.

Teaching is hard, skilled work. Anyone who says otherwise ("because once I had this teacher who didn't seem to be doing very much") is talking right out of their arse.

But that is the curse of the teacher proffession. Everyone has to have been in school for a large part of their life. In that way all people have come in contact with teachers, probably more so than with any other proffession (not counting your own proffession/collegues). So everyone thinks they're an expert.

As someone currently in a teaching program it's a bit disheartening to read. Apparently I'm an underachiever that managed to get into a teacher's program after living for 3 years in a foreign country and learning the language to a sufficient degree that I can understand the academic reading material.