4 ms·

I'm not sure this is a fair comparison on many levels. Especially since you're valuing #2 very highly; it is worth 45% to very few educators. (I suspect you'r

by mlyle 4y ago

I'm not sure this is a fair comparison on many levels. Especially since you're valuing #2 very highly; it is worth 45% to very few educators. (I suspect you're ignoring time value of money or the fact that teachers generally have to contribute to these defined benefit plans). You're also ignoring credentialing, continuing education, and total education requirements. In my case, I work 40 weeks a year. I work at a private school and just have a 403(b) plan which has less favorable matching and vesting than most 401(k) plans. My total comp is well under 10% of what I could make in private industry. It's not exactly easier work to do well, either. In this area (SF Bay Area), it's not really a living wage unless you have a spouse that can subsidize you. In the end, the low comp is causing a lot of teachers to self-select out of the profession, and it's a reason why we have a teacher shortage. If the pay were as ample as you suggest, this would not be happening. An equally big reason is the low social status and often-poor working conditions of teachers. The public spends boatloads on education, but in the public sector, a bigger and bigger administrative class and dubious, administrative-driven spending gobbles it up.

rahimnathwani 4y ago
Thanks for sharing some details of your situation. Before I provide a more substantive reply, I want to point out this line from my comment: When considering whether public school teachers are underpaid on average I was talking specifically about public school teachers, so what I wrote was definitely not meant to apply to your situation. > you're valuing #2 very highly; it is worth 45% to very few educators Take a look at this page of actual salaries for SFUSD, and actual total pay and benefits for SFUSD teachers: https://transparentcalifornia.com/salaries/search/?q=Eld%20Classroom%20Teacher&y=2020 https://transparentcalifornia.com/salaries/search/?q=Eld%20C... Total pay is 43% to 153% higher than base pay. The average % is 55%. I'm not cherry picking. I just picked a job role that people think is underpaid (elementary school teacher), and looked at the first page of results. > In the end, the low comp is causing a lot of teachers to self-select out of the profession, and it's a reason why we have a teacher shortage. You're probably right about this. But I suspect this causes the most capable people to leave (or just never consider entering) the profession. I'm in favour of both raising the bar for teachers, and paying them more to attract people who can meet that bar. Unfortunately, it seems like districts and unions are unwilling to hold teachers to account[0]. (Yes, I know districts have many other failings that are more severe than this.) > You're also ignoring credentialing, continuing education > and total education requirements. Honestly I'm skeptical of the value of some of the stuff required for teachers to become and stay credentialed. And teaching is far from the only job that requires continuing education. > My total comp is well under 10% of what I could make in private industry. This is really interesting. Do you mind me asking how you look at this decision? e.g. why not take the job paying 10x what you make now, and use some of the excess money to help students in other ways? Or take a part-time job paying 5x, and volunteer the rest of the time? [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waiting_for_%22Superman%22 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waiting_for_%22Superman%22
- mlyle 4y ago
  > Take a look at this page of actual salaries for SFUSD, and actual total pay and benefits for SFUSD teachers: https://transparentcalifornia.com/salaries/search/?q=Eld%20C https://transparentcalifornia.com/salaries/search/?q=Eld%20C... You're showing the top of a table sorted by total comp in a particularly well paid district (as property tax revenues pay teachers). This is not representative. The top entry in the table was occupying an administrative role. > I'm in favour of both raising the bar for teachers, and paying them more to attract people who can meet that bar. You can't raise standards while you have a shortage. You need a surplus to be selective. > And teaching is far from the only job that requires continuing education. Yes, but it's rare in the cohort of jobs you are seeking to compare against. > This is really interesting. Do you mind me asking how you look at this decision? e.g. why not take the job paying 10x what you make now, and use some of the excess money to help students in other ways? Or take a part-time job paying 5x, and volunteer the rest of the time? I enjoy it and it feels more impactful. This is why teachers accept being underpaid and having worse working conditions.
  - rahimnathwani 4y ago
    > You're showing the top of a table sorted by total comp in a particularly well paid district (as property tax revenues pay teachers). This is not representative. This is how I chose that link: 1. Go to the web site. 2. Enter the name of a friend who is an SFUSD elementary school teacher. 3. Click on the job title. Whilst SFUSD may not seem representative to you, it seems representative to me, because: - it's my local district, and where I had planned to send my son to school - there are often cries that SFUSD teachers are underpaid, can't afford to live in SF etc. I'd encourage you to share a different link, that shows evidence that my 45% claim is off. > You can't raise standards while you have a shortage. You need a surplus to be selective. Yes you can, if you have to be willing to relax two assumptions: - public school teacher pay must be based only on tenure and credentials (i.e. you can't pay new teachers more than existing teachers) - new teachers must be willing to spend a year getting a teaching credential (i.e. no one can easily switch jobs from a different profession) These two are preventing public schools from tapping sources of great teachers (e.g. folks like you, with industry experience and a love of teaching). Imagine if Sal Khan were to apply for a teaching position at SFUSD, and was willing to work for $150k base. They wouldn't hire him, because: - he doesn't have a teaching credential (AFAIK); - even though he might be as effective as two existing teachers, union contracts determine pay ranges. > I enjoy it and it feels more impactful. Yup, 100% makes sense.

by mlyle 4y ago

rahimnathwani 4y ago

Thanks for sharing some details of your situation. Before I provide a more substantive reply, I want to point out this line from my comment: When considering whether public school teachers are underpaid on average I was talking specifically about public school teachers, so what I wrote was definitely not meant to apply to your situation. > you're valuing #2 very highly; it is worth 45% to very few educators Take a look at this page of actual salaries for SFUSD, and actual total pay and benefits for SFUSD teachers: https://transparentcalifornia.com/salaries/search/?q=Eld%20Classroom%20Teacher&y=2020 https://transparentcalifornia.com/salaries/search/?q=Eld%20C... Total pay is 43% to 153% higher than base pay. The average % is 55%. I'm not cherry picking. I just picked a job role that people think is underpaid (elementary school teacher), and looked at the first page of results. > In the end, the low comp is causing a lot of teachers to self-select out of the profession, and it's a reason why we have a teacher shortage. You're probably right about this. But I suspect this causes the most capable people to leave (or just never consider entering) the profession. I'm in favour of both raising the bar for teachers, and paying them more to attract people who can meet that bar. Unfortunately, it seems like districts and unions are unwilling to hold teachers to account[0]. (Yes, I know districts have many other failings that are more severe than this.) > You're also ignoring credentialing, continuing education > and total education requirements. Honestly I'm skeptical of the value of some of the stuff required for teachers to become and stay credentialed. And teaching is far from the only job that requires continuing education. > My total comp is well under 10% of what I could make in private industry. This is really interesting. Do you mind me asking how you look at this decision? e.g. why not take the job paying 10x what you make now, and use some of the excess money to help students in other ways? Or take a part-time job paying 5x, and volunteer the rest of the time? [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waiting_for_%22Superman%22 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waiting_for_%22Superman%22

mlyle 4y ago
> Take a look at this page of actual salaries for SFUSD, and actual total pay and benefits for SFUSD teachers: https://transparentcalifornia.com/salaries/search/?q=Eld%20C https://transparentcalifornia.com/salaries/search/?q=Eld%20C... You're showing the top of a table sorted by total comp in a particularly well paid district (as property tax revenues pay teachers). This is not representative. The top entry in the table was occupying an administrative role. > I'm in favour of both raising the bar for teachers, and paying them more to attract people who can meet that bar. You can't raise standards while you have a shortage. You need a surplus to be selective. > And teaching is far from the only job that requires continuing education. Yes, but it's rare in the cohort of jobs you are seeking to compare against. > This is really interesting. Do you mind me asking how you look at this decision? e.g. why not take the job paying 10x what you make now, and use some of the excess money to help students in other ways? Or take a part-time job paying 5x, and volunteer the rest of the time? I enjoy it and it feels more impactful. This is why teachers accept being underpaid and having worse working conditions.
- rahimnathwani 4y ago
  > You're showing the top of a table sorted by total comp in a particularly well paid district (as property tax revenues pay teachers). This is not representative. This is how I chose that link: 1. Go to the web site. 2. Enter the name of a friend who is an SFUSD elementary school teacher. 3. Click on the job title. Whilst SFUSD may not seem representative to you, it seems representative to me, because: - it's my local district, and where I had planned to send my son to school - there are often cries that SFUSD teachers are underpaid, can't afford to live in SF etc. I'd encourage you to share a different link, that shows evidence that my 45% claim is off. > You can't raise standards while you have a shortage. You need a surplus to be selective. Yes you can, if you have to be willing to relax two assumptions: - public school teacher pay must be based only on tenure and credentials (i.e. you can't pay new teachers more than existing teachers) - new teachers must be willing to spend a year getting a teaching credential (i.e. no one can easily switch jobs from a different profession) These two are preventing public schools from tapping sources of great teachers (e.g. folks like you, with industry experience and a love of teaching). Imagine if Sal Khan were to apply for a teaching position at SFUSD, and was willing to work for $150k base. They wouldn't hire him, because: - he doesn't have a teaching credential (AFAIK); - even though he might be as effective as two existing teachers, union contracts determine pay ranges. > I enjoy it and it feels more impactful. Yup, 100% makes sense.