27 ms·

I've never known a decent teacher that puts in less than fifty hours per week, and a typical week is more demanding than all but the most stressful weeks I've w

I've never known a decent teacher that puts in less than fifty hours per week, and a typical week is more demanding than all but the most stressful weeks I've worked in software.

onlyrealcuzzo 7y ago
I've always wanted to be a teacher, still do. But their job is like 10x harder than mine and pays 1/10th the price, so as much as I'd enjoy it and I think I'd be good at it, it just seems insane. Good thing there's always a budget to build newer fancier schools, but not to pay teachers livable wages, cause that makes sense.
- Consultant32452 7y ago
  I think the difficulty of the job is relative to your talent set. My favorite teacher was my AP calc teacher in high school. She only graded during her planning session, never worked overtime, let us not only fix a broken classroom computer that the school basically abandoned but we also take turns playing GTA on it during lectures. Almost everyone in the class passed the AP exam. She was in MENSA and left a lucrative career fixing math for defense contractors because she just wanted to teach. There just aren't enough people with those kinds of chops to go around, regardless of the salary we are willing to pay.
  - black_knight 7y ago
    How much preparations and grading there is depends on the subject (among other things). And mathematics is where you get most for free for just being smart and knowing your subject. In (good) mathematics lessons, very little of the time is spent explaining the theory. Instead a lot time is spent doing exercises – both the teacher demonstrating and the students trying it out them selves. At that point the teaching becomes reactive, as the student get stuck and you help them figure it out. This requires little prep (basically finding good exercises). In other subjects there is much more story telling and explaining. And it requires much more preparations in order to make it interesting, and keeping all kinds of details fresh in your mind. As for grading, grading mathematics is quick and mechanical. While correcting an essay is a lot more draining. So, I do not think talent is actually what is deciding factor here. The way you phrase it, it sounds to me like "Oh, if the teacher were better at their job they would have to work a lot less".
    - Consultant32452 7y ago
      Grading a multiplication test in grade school might be quick and mechanical but grading trig and calculus is not. >"Oh, if the teacher were better at their job they would have to work a lot less". I'm 100% saying exactly that. This is true of basically every profession. Some people are more effective/efficient/faster than others.
      - black_knight 7y ago
        > Grading a multiplication test in grade school might be quick and mechanical but grading trig and calculus is not. I gravely disagree. I spent a lot of time grading calculus exams at universities, and it is a quick and fairly mechanical procedure. A group of five can churn through three hundred final exams in a working day. Answers in maths are quite uniform and contain a few sentences which can be quickly judged by how correct they are. Calculus and trigonometry might be difficult for the students, but for someone who has taught it a few years, it is absolutely straight forward to recognise correct solutions. Grading say, English short stories or essays is a completely different thing. There are a lot more sentences, which have to be analysed grammatically and semantically. You have to judge how coherent the student is, which is a non-local property. Does the end match the beginning? What is the student trying to say? Do they use a clear language? If not, what feed-back can you give that will improve it. What literary effects does the student command? Allusions? Irony? Foreshadowing? Contrast? The answers are highly personal and even using rubric grading every one is a non-trivial judgement call. I believe that the nature of the tasks and subjects have a bigger impact on how much time it takes to grade it, than how efficient the individual grader is. I have experience correcting in groups where I have been able to compare grading speed. Yes there are differences between how fast people grade, but they are minor, and often speed is inversely correlated with quality (of feedback given to the student). > Some people are more effective/efficient/faster than others. Learning takes time. Students learn by doing different activities related to the topic. Sometimes listening to the teacher explaining, sometimes working on problems of their own. In mathematics, it is easy to find good examples to demonstrate and problems for the students to work with. Other subjects, it is much more difficult, and requires prep work. Taking less time to prepare will usually mean worse teaching. For instance I had a history teacher who would just put on recordings from History Channel. He thus had to spend little time preparing the lessons. But the learning outcome was not the best.
- ikeyany 7y ago
  You can always do what the teachers with connections do, and simply teach at private/charter schools.
- bumby 7y ago
  I think it's hyperbolic to claim teachers don't make 'livable' wages. In the U.S. median teacher salary is north of $60k [0]. Maybe there's an argument that this is too low to be fair but when the median U.S. wage is below $32k/yr it's hard to make the case it's not livable Sometimes HN takes too much of a SV-centric view, especially in terms of wages. [0] https://www.onetonline.org/link/summary/25-2031.00 https://www.onetonline.org/link/summary/25-2031.00
  - onlyrealcuzzo 7y ago
    Okay, but starting teacher salaries in CA are in the low $40s. Try living in SF or LA on that. I know my friend was teaching for 8 years and got a job in LA for $80k, but she left to go to Vegas because they pay a lot better there ~$100k, plus no state tax, plus it's way cheaper. So, yes, maybe median is not bad. But starting out -- especially in a city -- seems really bad. Especially when you factor in almost all of these teachers have college debt of about $30k+ to pay off...
    - bumby 7y ago
      The article touched on that point, though. It spoke about how the narrative is skewed because many teachers are in rural locations. That same link shows that the median teacher salary in California is $82k, which is still 17% above the median household income in California [1]. The average student loan debt is right around $30k [2], so above average wages combined with average student loan debt shouldn't be construed as unlivable, unless that term is extended way beyond the plight of teachers (which may still be fair). Again, it should be taken in context (outside the SV bubble). I know engineers who started at <$40k (albeit a few years back during the recession) [1] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEHOINUSCAA646N https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEHOINUSCAA646N [2] https://www.federalreserve.gov/publications/2017-economic-well-being-of-us-households-in-2016-education-debt-loans.htm https://www.federalreserve.gov/publications/2017-economic-we...

I've never known a decent teacher that puts in less than fifty hours per week, and a typical week is more demanding than all but the most stressful weeks I've worked in software.

onlyrealcuzzo 7y ago

I've always wanted to be a teacher, still do. But their job is like 10x harder than mine and pays 1/10th the price, so as much as I'd enjoy it and I think I'd be good at it, it just seems insane. Good thing there's always a budget to build newer fancier schools, but not to pay teachers livable wages, cause that makes sense.

Consultant32452 7y ago
I think the difficulty of the job is relative to your talent set. My favorite teacher was my AP calc teacher in high school. She only graded during her planning session, never worked overtime, let us not only fix a broken classroom computer that the school basically abandoned but we also take turns playing GTA on it during lectures. Almost everyone in the class passed the AP exam. She was in MENSA and left a lucrative career fixing math for defense contractors because she just wanted to teach. There just aren't enough people with those kinds of chops to go around, regardless of the salary we are willing to pay.
- black_knight 7y ago
  How much preparations and grading there is depends on the subject (among other things). And mathematics is where you get most for free for just being smart and knowing your subject. In (good) mathematics lessons, very little of the time is spent explaining the theory. Instead a lot time is spent doing exercises – both the teacher demonstrating and the students trying it out them selves. At that point the teaching becomes reactive, as the student get stuck and you help them figure it out. This requires little prep (basically finding good exercises). In other subjects there is much more story telling and explaining. And it requires much more preparations in order to make it interesting, and keeping all kinds of details fresh in your mind. As for grading, grading mathematics is quick and mechanical. While correcting an essay is a lot more draining. So, I do not think talent is actually what is deciding factor here. The way you phrase it, it sounds to me like "Oh, if the teacher were better at their job they would have to work a lot less".
  - Consultant32452 7y ago
    Grading a multiplication test in grade school might be quick and mechanical but grading trig and calculus is not. >"Oh, if the teacher were better at their job they would have to work a lot less". I'm 100% saying exactly that. This is true of basically every profession. Some people are more effective/efficient/faster than others.
    - black_knight 7y ago
      > Grading a multiplication test in grade school might be quick and mechanical but grading trig and calculus is not. I gravely disagree. I spent a lot of time grading calculus exams at universities, and it is a quick and fairly mechanical procedure. A group of five can churn through three hundred final exams in a working day. Answers in maths are quite uniform and contain a few sentences which can be quickly judged by how correct they are. Calculus and trigonometry might be difficult for the students, but for someone who has taught it a few years, it is absolutely straight forward to recognise correct solutions. Grading say, English short stories or essays is a completely different thing. There are a lot more sentences, which have to be analysed grammatically and semantically. You have to judge how coherent the student is, which is a non-local property. Does the end match the beginning? What is the student trying to say? Do they use a clear language? If not, what feed-back can you give that will improve it. What literary effects does the student command? Allusions? Irony? Foreshadowing? Contrast? The answers are highly personal and even using rubric grading every one is a non-trivial judgement call. I believe that the nature of the tasks and subjects have a bigger impact on how much time it takes to grade it, than how efficient the individual grader is. I have experience correcting in groups where I have been able to compare grading speed. Yes there are differences between how fast people grade, but they are minor, and often speed is inversely correlated with quality (of feedback given to the student). > Some people are more effective/efficient/faster than others. Learning takes time. Students learn by doing different activities related to the topic. Sometimes listening to the teacher explaining, sometimes working on problems of their own. In mathematics, it is easy to find good examples to demonstrate and problems for the students to work with. Other subjects, it is much more difficult, and requires prep work. Taking less time to prepare will usually mean worse teaching. For instance I had a history teacher who would just put on recordings from History Channel. He thus had to spend little time preparing the lessons. But the learning outcome was not the best.
ikeyany 7y ago
You can always do what the teachers with connections do, and simply teach at private/charter schools.
bumby 7y ago
I think it's hyperbolic to claim teachers don't make 'livable' wages. In the U.S. median teacher salary is north of $60k [0]. Maybe there's an argument that this is too low to be fair but when the median U.S. wage is below $32k/yr it's hard to make the case it's not livable Sometimes HN takes too much of a SV-centric view, especially in terms of wages. [0] https://www.onetonline.org/link/summary/25-2031.00 https://www.onetonline.org/link/summary/25-2031.00
- onlyrealcuzzo 7y ago
  Okay, but starting teacher salaries in CA are in the low $40s. Try living in SF or LA on that. I know my friend was teaching for 8 years and got a job in LA for $80k, but she left to go to Vegas because they pay a lot better there ~$100k, plus no state tax, plus it's way cheaper. So, yes, maybe median is not bad. But starting out -- especially in a city -- seems really bad. Especially when you factor in almost all of these teachers have college debt of about $30k+ to pay off...
  - bumby 7y ago
    The article touched on that point, though. It spoke about how the narrative is skewed because many teachers are in rural locations. That same link shows that the median teacher salary in California is $82k, which is still 17% above the median household income in California [1]. The average student loan debt is right around $30k [2], so above average wages combined with average student loan debt shouldn't be construed as unlivable, unless that term is extended way beyond the plight of teachers (which may still be fair). Again, it should be taken in context (outside the SV bubble). I know engineers who started at <$40k (albeit a few years back during the recession) [1] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEHOINUSCAA646N https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEHOINUSCAA646N [2] https://www.federalreserve.gov/publications/2017-economic-well-being-of-us-households-in-2016-education-debt-loans.htm https://www.federalreserve.gov/publications/2017-economic-we...