8 ms·

> Teaching doesn’t attract highly paid workers because in addition to a big pay cut those workers would be considering likely worse working conditions as well.

> Teaching doesn’t attract highly paid workers because in addition to a big pay cut those workers would be considering likely worse working conditions as well. You could double teacher pay and it wouldn't make a lick of difference. As a teacher, you have no control over your classroom. Disruptive students that destroy everybody else's learning environment? Too bad. No Child Left Behind! Wait, that's the old slogan, what's the new one? Equity Uber Alles? Equity Macht Frei? It changes so often, I keep forgetting. Assaulted by the kids? Suck it up, we don't want to be sued! Better to have a battered teacher -- the Unions will keep them in check -- than a lawyered-up parent. I have seen this first-hand. Want to actually teach kids things they need to learn to succeed? This is the wrong job for you. I know a lot of motivated folks that went into teaching, with big salary bonuses, full scholarships for their degrees, everything. None of them lasted more than four years. Public education in the US selects for Dolores Umbridge, and against Remis Lupin.

thomastjeffery 5y ago
> You could double teacher pay and it wouldn't make a lick of difference. I sincerely doubt that. Having a teacher who isn't struggling financially would be a huge improvement.
- z3ncyberpunk 5y ago
  You're failing, like most of the crowd here on venture capital forum, is thinking that money is the most and only important factor.
- kickout 5y ago
  OP is correct. double your salary at your job, but have to take verbal abuse and berated from your 'boss' and see how that paycheck affects your life
  - hypnoscripto 5y ago
    If your salary is high enough that you can save some money then you aren’t required to put up with bullshit in order to keep eating food.
    - bnj 5y ago
      Do you mean that by saving money people can leave the profession sooner or at least move to a school with more favorable working conditions? If so, maybe you’ve hit on a kernel of truth: we can’t risk paying teachers enough that they’d have the financial security to leave a bad work situation.
      - throwaway894345 5y ago
        Am I the only one who thinks “we should pay teachers more so they can afford a new profession because public education is horrible” is the wrong takeaway? Like, why not fix public education (e.g., more teacher autonomy) or at least support some voucher program so more teachers can be private school teachers?
        hypnoscripto 5y ago
        See my reply above. I didn’t think this idea would be controversial. Working conditions should improve when the workers have other options.
        hutzlibu 5y ago
        "Working conditions should improve when the workers have other options." So when the workers have not other options, working conditions can stay low?
        hypnoscripto 5y ago
        It’s not a “should” it’s just what happens.
      - hypnoscripto 5y ago
  - fakedang 5y ago
    Investment bankers barely enjoy their jobs and take a lot of abuse from their bosses, yet there is no shortage of banker aspirants. Some even stay for the long haul, or go to even worse working conditions such as private equity, for more money.
    - kickout 5y ago
      Investment bankers also have autonomy and generally work in small teams. Not responsible for human beings, just capital. Also if a IB gets fired (but is good) they are probably employed within a week. A good teacher that gets fired (for fighting the bad administration? Good luck...
      - fakedang 5y ago
        To draw parallels, an investment banker who goes against the system would likewise not be hired, but rather virtually blackballed. And good luck for whistle blowers in any financial institution. Also investment bankers have as much autonomy as a client allows them to. And MDs and VPs are as much responsible for their subordinates and client relationships (although not in the same way as teachers are for students).
  - thomastjeffery 5y ago
    Yet public school teachers do this all the time. They take low pay and a bad work environment, and keep teaching anyway. Why? Because they are passionate about teaching. I had several high-school teachers who weren't financially comfortable, yet still chose to spend hundreds or even thousands on their students during a school year. Of course, those teachers would have been much more effective if they were in a financially stable position. I also would have had fewer quality teachers leave.
kickout 5y ago
Although an insanely complex topic, this basically sums up my views (spouse is a 6-8 teacher). Teachers have no autonomy to teach (which discipline is apart of).
syops 5y ago
Want to actually teach kids things they need to learn to succeed? This is the wrong job for you. I teach at a community college and for years I've told newcomers to profession that one thing this job is not about is teaching.
- Leparamour 5y ago
  >and for years I've told newcomers to profession that one thing this job is not about is teaching. So, what is about then?
  - syops 5y ago
    High passing rate and minimal number of student complaints. No one in administration cares if the high passing rate is because standards were lowered. All they care about is that more than x% pass.
    - Leparamour 5y ago
      Another sad instance of Strahern's adaptation of Goodhart's law[1]: "When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure" [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodhart%27s_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodhart%27s_law
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
brightball 5y ago
Stuff like this drives the push for things like vouchers. I’m lucky to be able to send my kids to a good private school. We chose it after a tour and discussion with the headmaster about exactly how it operates. The teachers as a group research and plan curriculum. They coordinate across grade levels and determine how to roll out changes in the most effective way possible for students and parents as well. They rolled out common core math over 5 years with great success well before it was forced on public schools. In other words, they let the people who have studied to be professional educators make decisions about the best way to…educate. There’s no school board, no state level involvement, no federal disruption every time there’s an election. And it’s fantastic. I see this work and my first instinct is that EVERYONE should have an option like this, not just the people who can afford it. For that reason, I support some type of voucher program that could achieve these goals. Yet for some reason in the US this is a political hot button, which doesn’t make any sense to me. Currently, the only people who have all the options are people who can afford them out of pocket. Everybody else is stuck with either public school or home school and home school is on the rise.
- tw04 5y ago
  Well right, because they can kick out students who are disruptive and make them the public school systems problem. When the public school system becomes insolvent, what’s your solution for those students? They just don’t get an education? We hope someone else has a solution? Vouchers are a great way to permanently cement the cradle to prison cycle.
  - throwaway894345 5y ago
    Why should disruptive students be tolerated in public school classrooms? Does the disruptive student actually get an education simply by virtue of being in the classroom? He certainly drags his peers down, but how much is he actually educated in the process, and is that worth the harm he does his peers? > Vouchers are a great way to permanently cement the cradle to prison cycle. I could as easily say they are a way out of the cradle to prison cycle for many at risk youths.
  - mlyle 5y ago
Aerroon 5y ago
And ultimately, the teacher doesn't get to choose what they teach either. Somebody else decides that and gives teachers a long list of things that the students have to know.
dr_dshiv 5y ago
I am curious whether there are any systems that let parents choose teachers within a school — and let teachers admit students they will take. So they can make more if they are in demand — and that students that are "problems" will result in greater income for the teachers that take them. A kind of "choice-based" market system within a school.

thomastjeffery 5y ago

> You could double teacher pay and it wouldn't make a lick of difference. I sincerely doubt that. Having a teacher who isn't struggling financially would be a huge improvement.

z3ncyberpunk 5y ago
You're failing, like most of the crowd here on venture capital forum, is thinking that money is the most and only important factor.
kickout 5y ago
OP is correct. double your salary at your job, but have to take verbal abuse and berated from your 'boss' and see how that paycheck affects your life
- hypnoscripto 5y ago
  If your salary is high enough that you can save some money then you aren’t required to put up with bullshit in order to keep eating food.
  - bnj 5y ago
    Do you mean that by saving money people can leave the profession sooner or at least move to a school with more favorable working conditions? If so, maybe you’ve hit on a kernel of truth: we can’t risk paying teachers enough that they’d have the financial security to leave a bad work situation.
    - throwaway894345 5y ago
      Am I the only one who thinks “we should pay teachers more so they can afford a new profession because public education is horrible” is the wrong takeaway? Like, why not fix public education (e.g., more teacher autonomy) or at least support some voucher program so more teachers can be private school teachers?
      - hypnoscripto 5y ago
        See my reply above. I didn’t think this idea would be controversial. Working conditions should improve when the workers have other options.
        hutzlibu 5y ago
        "Working conditions should improve when the workers have other options." So when the workers have not other options, working conditions can stay low?
        hypnoscripto 5y ago
        It’s not a “should” it’s just what happens.
    - hypnoscripto 5y ago
- fakedang 5y ago
  Investment bankers barely enjoy their jobs and take a lot of abuse from their bosses, yet there is no shortage of banker aspirants. Some even stay for the long haul, or go to even worse working conditions such as private equity, for more money.
  - kickout 5y ago
    Investment bankers also have autonomy and generally work in small teams. Not responsible for human beings, just capital. Also if a IB gets fired (but is good) they are probably employed within a week. A good teacher that gets fired (for fighting the bad administration? Good luck...
    - fakedang 5y ago
      To draw parallels, an investment banker who goes against the system would likewise not be hired, but rather virtually blackballed. And good luck for whistle blowers in any financial institution. Also investment bankers have as much autonomy as a client allows them to. And MDs and VPs are as much responsible for their subordinates and client relationships (although not in the same way as teachers are for students).
- thomastjeffery 5y ago
  Yet public school teachers do this all the time. They take low pay and a bad work environment, and keep teaching anyway. Why? Because they are passionate about teaching. I had several high-school teachers who weren't financially comfortable, yet still chose to spend hundreds or even thousands on their students during a school year. Of course, those teachers would have been much more effective if they were in a financially stable position. I also would have had fewer quality teachers leave.

kickout 5y ago

Although an insanely complex topic, this basically sums up my views (spouse is a 6-8 teacher). Teachers have no autonomy to teach (which discipline is apart of).

syops 5y ago

Want to actually teach kids things they need to learn to succeed? This is the wrong job for you. I teach at a community college and for years I've told newcomers to profession that one thing this job is not about is teaching.

Leparamour 5y ago
>and for years I've told newcomers to profession that one thing this job is not about is teaching. So, what is about then?
- syops 5y ago
  High passing rate and minimal number of student complaints. No one in administration cares if the high passing rate is because standards were lowered. All they care about is that more than x% pass.
  - Leparamour 5y ago
    Another sad instance of Strahern's adaptation of Goodhart's law[1]: "When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure" [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodhart%27s_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodhart%27s_law
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

brightball 5y ago

Stuff like this drives the push for things like vouchers. I’m lucky to be able to send my kids to a good private school. We chose it after a tour and discussion with the headmaster about exactly how it operates. The teachers as a group research and plan curriculum. They coordinate across grade levels and determine how to roll out changes in the most effective way possible for students and parents as well. They rolled out common core math over 5 years with great success well before it was forced on public schools. In other words, they let the people who have studied to be professional educators make decisions about the best way to…educate. There’s no school board, no state level involvement, no federal disruption every time there’s an election. And it’s fantastic. I see this work and my first instinct is that EVERYONE should have an option like this, not just the people who can afford it. For that reason, I support some type of voucher program that could achieve these goals. Yet for some reason in the US this is a political hot button, which doesn’t make any sense to me. Currently, the only people who have all the options are people who can afford them out of pocket. Everybody else is stuck with either public school or home school and home school is on the rise.

tw04 5y ago
Well right, because they can kick out students who are disruptive and make them the public school systems problem. When the public school system becomes insolvent, what’s your solution for those students? They just don’t get an education? We hope someone else has a solution? Vouchers are a great way to permanently cement the cradle to prison cycle.
- throwaway894345 5y ago
  Why should disruptive students be tolerated in public school classrooms? Does the disruptive student actually get an education simply by virtue of being in the classroom? He certainly drags his peers down, but how much is he actually educated in the process, and is that worth the harm he does his peers? > Vouchers are a great way to permanently cement the cradle to prison cycle. I could as easily say they are a way out of the cradle to prison cycle for many at risk youths.
- mlyle 5y ago

Aerroon 5y ago

And ultimately, the teacher doesn't get to choose what they teach either. Somebody else decides that and gives teachers a long list of things that the students have to know.

dr_dshiv 5y ago

I am curious whether there are any systems that let parents choose teachers within a school — and let teachers admit students they will take. So they can make more if they are in demand — and that students that are "problems" will result in greater income for the teachers that take them. A kind of "choice-based" market system within a school.