3 ms·

I don't know exactly what the "science industry" is, but in general this is bunk. K-12 education is paid vastly better (in terms of money and job security) than

I don't know exactly what the "science industry" is, but in general this is bunk. K-12 education is paid vastly better (in terms of money and job security) than most scientists. Perhaps tenured profs do better, but most scientists are not tenured profs. What are you basing this off of? Just looking at Payscale, k-12 median is about 42k per year, a research scientist is over 60k median, all scientist salaries listed the lower end is around 50k: http://www.payscale.com/research/US/All_K-12_Teachers/Salary/by_Job http://www.payscale.com/research/US/All_K-12_Teachers/Salary... http://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Research_Scientist/Salary http://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Research_Scientist/S...

yummyfajitas 16y ago
I'm mainly comparing people of comparable age, and including all the possible "scientist" career paths (not just the very successful paths). I'll use NYC salary schedules for concrete numbers. http://schools.nyc.gov/NR/rdonlyres/72DE1FF1-EDFC-40D7-9D61-831014B39D1E/0/TeacherSalarySchedule20083.pdf http://schools.nyc.gov/NR/rdonlyres/72DE1FF1-EDFC-40D7-9D61-... 22. (fresh out of college). Teacher gets $45k (for working 9 months/year) with great benefits + defined benefit pension. The scientist (grad student, working 12 months/year) gets about $20k. With some luck, the grad student gets health care. 27. (PhD granted). Teacher is up to about $50k, maybe more, and has tenure. Scientist will, with luck, get a job as a postdoc. Pay will range from $30-60k, and his contract is up after 3 years. Many scientists will fail to get a postdoc, and will either work at a low end teaching college (pay ~ $30-45k), become an adjunct (usually with pay < $20k) or leave the field entirely. 30. Teacher is up to $60k, maybe $70k if they got a masters. If the scientist gets a tenure track job, his salary is up to maybe $80k (if he works at a Research 1), or considerably less if he doesn't. He might instead be working on his second postdoc (pay $30-60k). Or he might be working at a low end teaching college (pay perhaps up to 50-60k), or still an adjunct (pay < $20k). In some cases, scientists in this age range might go to work at the corporate "Research Scientist" jobs you described. In that case, they might be getting around $50k, perhaps up to $120k in hot fields. 35. Teacher, if I'm reading the NYC chart right, is between 70 and 85k. The scientist might have gotten tenure, in which case he is probably making close to $100k. He might not get promoted, in which case he is back to $80k (assuming he finds another tenure track job). He might be working on his third/fourth postdoc, where he is still in the $30-60k range. Or he might be an adjunct, pay < $20k. The top scientists are certainly paid better than teachers. But most scientists are not. And adjusting for time worked (teachers don't work very hard, scientists do) and 3 months of vacation, scientists are definitely paid worse.
- ylem 16y ago
  However, is it fair to compare student pay to professional pay? On the strictly fiscal side, there is the general unemployment rate to consider as well.
- SigmundA 16y ago
  Using NYC salary schedule and then comparing to an average scientist salary that you have no source for is very disingenuous. NYC has an extremely high standard of living and all wages are higher there, this is common knowledge. This doesn't change the facts on the national average that I posted, 42k. Then you argue most scientist will not get postdoc but end up a teacher, which is supposed to be so a much better paying job, but not for them? I didn't post stats for "top" scientist, I posted national averages, and if you looked all scientist categories averaged higher than teachers period. teachers don't work very hard, scientists do Wow, you don't have an agenda do you...
  - yummyfajitas 16y ago
    Actually, you didn't post any national averages. You posted data sets from payscale.com, which is a nonscientific sampling. The high end numbers I gave you on scientist pay are big city numbers (NY, Chicago, LA, expensive parts of NJ). Actually, some of the medium range numbers are also available in the expensive parts of NJ. Most scientists who wind up as a teacher will be teaching at college, which does pay considerably less. If you want to include them under teacher, be my guest. In that case you are correct, but with the caveat that most scientists fall off the scientific career path and land on the low end of teaching. I stand by my statement that teachers don't work very hard. So does the BLS. http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2008/03/art4full.pdf http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2008/03/art4full.pdf

yummyfajitas 16y ago

I'm mainly comparing people of comparable age, and including all the possible "scientist" career paths (not just the very successful paths). I'll use NYC salary schedules for concrete numbers. http://schools.nyc.gov/NR/rdonlyres/72DE1FF1-EDFC-40D7-9D61-831014B39D1E/0/TeacherSalarySchedule20083.pdf http://schools.nyc.gov/NR/rdonlyres/72DE1FF1-EDFC-40D7-9D61-... 22. (fresh out of college). Teacher gets $45k (for working 9 months/year) with great benefits + defined benefit pension. The scientist (grad student, working 12 months/year) gets about $20k. With some luck, the grad student gets health care. 27. (PhD granted). Teacher is up to about $50k, maybe more, and has tenure. Scientist will, with luck, get a job as a postdoc. Pay will range from $30-60k, and his contract is up after 3 years. Many scientists will fail to get a postdoc, and will either work at a low end teaching college (pay ~ $30-45k), become an adjunct (usually with pay < $20k) or leave the field entirely. 30. Teacher is up to $60k, maybe $70k if they got a masters. If the scientist gets a tenure track job, his salary is up to maybe $80k (if he works at a Research 1), or considerably less if he doesn't. He might instead be working on his second postdoc (pay $30-60k). Or he might be working at a low end teaching college (pay perhaps up to 50-60k), or still an adjunct (pay < $20k). In some cases, scientists in this age range might go to work at the corporate "Research Scientist" jobs you described. In that case, they might be getting around $50k, perhaps up to $120k in hot fields. 35. Teacher, if I'm reading the NYC chart right, is between 70 and 85k. The scientist might have gotten tenure, in which case he is probably making close to $100k. He might not get promoted, in which case he is back to $80k (assuming he finds another tenure track job). He might be working on his third/fourth postdoc, where he is still in the $30-60k range. Or he might be an adjunct, pay < $20k. The top scientists are certainly paid better than teachers. But most scientists are not. And adjusting for time worked (teachers don't work very hard, scientists do) and 3 months of vacation, scientists are definitely paid worse.

ylem 16y ago
However, is it fair to compare student pay to professional pay? On the strictly fiscal side, there is the general unemployment rate to consider as well.
SigmundA 16y ago
Using NYC salary schedule and then comparing to an average scientist salary that you have no source for is very disingenuous. NYC has an extremely high standard of living and all wages are higher there, this is common knowledge. This doesn't change the facts on the national average that I posted, 42k. Then you argue most scientist will not get postdoc but end up a teacher, which is supposed to be so a much better paying job, but not for them? I didn't post stats for "top" scientist, I posted national averages, and if you looked all scientist categories averaged higher than teachers period. teachers don't work very hard, scientists do Wow, you don't have an agenda do you...
- yummyfajitas 16y ago
  Actually, you didn't post any national averages. You posted data sets from payscale.com, which is a nonscientific sampling. The high end numbers I gave you on scientist pay are big city numbers (NY, Chicago, LA, expensive parts of NJ). Actually, some of the medium range numbers are also available in the expensive parts of NJ. Most scientists who wind up as a teacher will be teaching at college, which does pay considerably less. If you want to include them under teacher, be my guest. In that case you are correct, but with the caveat that most scientists fall off the scientific career path and land on the low end of teaching. I stand by my statement that teachers don't work very hard. So does the BLS. http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2008/03/art4full.pdf http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2008/03/art4full.pdf