2 ms·

So it is non-market forces then. In a real education market teachers wouldn't have a salary that is function of time, but of the resolution of supply and demand

So it is non-market forces then. In a real education market teachers wouldn't have a salary that is function of time, but of the resolution of supply and demand. Parents, knowing that their child is interested in attending a school with a solid programming platform would pay more to schools that diverted resources towards this area. Those schools would be encouraged to locate competent teachers which they would do so with a combination of increased salary and possibly increased research time (or startup hacking time).

DannoHung 15y ago
That's assuming parents value their child's interest correctly rather than using their own set of assumptions about value. For non-college education, it's almost a guarantee that the consumer of the education product is not the purchaser.
jseliger 15y ago
"In a real education market teachers wouldn't have a salary that is function of time, but of the resolution of supply and demand." That's true, but teachers' unions demand that, with very few exceptions, all teachers with x years of experience be paid the same amount, regardless of discipline or skill. I wrote about this issue some in "Are teachers underpaid? It depends": http://jseliger.com/2011/07/10/are-teachers-underpaid-it-depends http://jseliger.com/2011/07/10/are-teachers-underpaid-it-dep..., since I don't think one can address the issue of "teacher" compensation without looking at teacher expertise and opportunity costs.