9 ms·

I don't care what some report says about hours in the aggregate, especially one that presumably intermingles running-out-the-clock 64yos with young teachers. P

I don't care what some report says about hours in the aggregate, especially one that presumably intermingles running-out-the-clock 64yos with young teachers. Please correct me if I am misunderstanding, but this seems to be flatly stating that Yummyfajitas was right in saying you do not care about the facts? I'm assuming you don't know many teachers, otherwise you would get what I'm saying here. I have an aunt and uncle that are teachers and a wife that is going to school to become a teacher right now, but I largely agree with yummyfajitas and he is carefully supporting his arguments with facts and links. If he and I are wrong about it, would you mind pointing out exactly how rather than saying we just don't understand?

jbooth 16y ago
To start with, the fact that it's comparing some self-reported statistics between teachers and "other professionals"? And mushing them together into some total minutes worked figure? They're estimating the hours worked by a teacher at less than 40. I've never met a teacher who put in less than 40 hours. Then, as I said upthread, the fact that it's mashing young teachers (the topic at hand) together with running-the-clock 64yo teachers really brings it all together. Maybe this explains the sub-40 hour workweek. Unfortunately, a 5-page PDF report with 4 graphs doesn't summarize the be-all of teaching.
- yummyfajitas 16y ago
  I assume "other professionals" means professionals who are not teachers, as per BLS classifications. http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/1981/11/rpt1full.pdf http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/1981/11/rpt1full.pdf Also, if you bothered to read my source as far as page 2, you'd realize that it does provide breakdowns based on teacher age. Apparently it's young teachers who work less, and older (50+) teachers who work more (5.1 hours). See table 2 on page 2.
  - jbooth 16y ago
    On that graph: "NOTE: The calculations of hours worked are based on data collected about how survey respondents spent “yesterday.” Thus, average weekly work hours are an extrapolation based on the activity for 1 day." I mean how much confidence do you have in this thing? And you're repeating it like it's the bible? Let me ask you a question, do you consider all hours of work equal? What if you compared office work to, say, mining, if they worked an hour fewer, would you say you work harder?
    - yummyfajitas 16y ago
      I don't understand - do you believe the note invalidates the table? If so, why? As for why I quote this study, the ATUS is the standard source for data of this nature. Feel free to post better data if you have it.
      - jbooth 16y ago
        Ok, fine, let's assume the data is great. My original point was that if you want better teachers, you need to pay them commensurate with the value they create. The private sector will generally reward professionals if their service is needed and valuable. If you grant that education is a public good, then it makes sense to pay for good workers. That means taking care of your people while disempowering the union. If you're hostile to the workers they're going to rally around that union, no matter what. You can accomplish more with effective management than with a blanket opposition to teachers being taken care of.

jbooth 16y ago

To start with, the fact that it's comparing some self-reported statistics between teachers and "other professionals"? And mushing them together into some total minutes worked figure? They're estimating the hours worked by a teacher at less than 40. I've never met a teacher who put in less than 40 hours. Then, as I said upthread, the fact that it's mashing young teachers (the topic at hand) together with running-the-clock 64yo teachers really brings it all together. Maybe this explains the sub-40 hour workweek. Unfortunately, a 5-page PDF report with 4 graphs doesn't summarize the be-all of teaching.

yummyfajitas 16y ago
I assume "other professionals" means professionals who are not teachers, as per BLS classifications. http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/1981/11/rpt1full.pdf http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/1981/11/rpt1full.pdf Also, if you bothered to read my source as far as page 2, you'd realize that it does provide breakdowns based on teacher age. Apparently it's young teachers who work less, and older (50+) teachers who work more (5.1 hours). See table 2 on page 2.
- jbooth 16y ago
  On that graph: "NOTE: The calculations of hours worked are based on data collected about how survey respondents spent “yesterday.” Thus, average weekly work hours are an extrapolation based on the activity for 1 day." I mean how much confidence do you have in this thing? And you're repeating it like it's the bible? Let me ask you a question, do you consider all hours of work equal? What if you compared office work to, say, mining, if they worked an hour fewer, would you say you work harder?
  - yummyfajitas 16y ago
    I don't understand - do you believe the note invalidates the table? If so, why? As for why I quote this study, the ATUS is the standard source for data of this nature. Feel free to post better data if you have it.
    - jbooth 16y ago
      Ok, fine, let's assume the data is great. My original point was that if you want better teachers, you need to pay them commensurate with the value they create. The private sector will generally reward professionals if their service is needed and valuable. If you grant that education is a public good, then it makes sense to pay for good workers. That means taking care of your people while disempowering the union. If you're hostile to the workers they're going to rally around that union, no matter what. You can accomplish more with effective management than with a blanket opposition to teachers being taken care of.