4 ms·

Well, the notion that all existing teachers are no good is not true, so that rationale doesn't really hold up. College graduation stats for teachers doesn't tel

Well, the notion that all existing teachers are no good is not true, so that rationale doesn't really hold up. College graduation stats for teachers doesn't tell the whole story of how teachers perform in their jobs and school districts. It is true that higher pay would attract more people to teaching, but there are a lot of factors that go into why teachers aren't paid more in the first place.

rayiner 13y ago
> Well, the notion that all existing teachers are no good is not true, so that rationale doesn't really hold up. There's two basic facts: 1) Teachers, in the U.S., are generally drawn from the bottom half of college graduates. 2) Generally, teachers get paid about as much as the average non-STEM college graduate. If the existing teachers we have are as "good as we need" then there is no reason to pay teachers more. There's no shortage of teachers at existing pay levels and teacher pay is consistent with the market pay for other college graduates of similar qualifications. Thus, those who lobby for higher teacher pay argue that it will attract more qualified people to teaching. They point to countries like Finland, where it is common for teachers to have been in the top 10% of their college classes. They note that STEM majors, who make more than non-STEM majors, take a major pay cut to go into teaching. But under that rationale, it makes no sense to pay more to existing teachers, who don't have those qualifications.
- dragonwriter 13y ago
  > Teachers, in the U.S., are generally drawn from the bottom half of college graduates. [citation needed] > There's no shortage of teachers at existing pay levels. The fact that a number of districts are forced to waive generally-applicable requirements (e.g., issue "emergency credentials", etc.) to get teachers and/or rely on series of long-term substitutes to assure that there is actually a teacher in the classroom suggests that this is not true
  - rayiner 13y ago
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/do-teachers-really-come-from-the-bottom-third-of-college-graduates/2011/12/07/gIQAg8HPdO_blog.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/do-tea...
    - dragonwriter 13y ago
      So its a weakened modification (from "bottom third" to "bottom half") to a claim that, even in the weaker form, has only fairly weak justification depending on the particular time-based slice of the teacher workforce you look at, and relies on ranking college graduates not by any kind of college performance, but by college entrance exams?
      - rayiner 13y ago
        Specifically: > The appendix to the report confirms that the “top-“ and “bottom” third figures are also based on SAT/ACT scores, specifically those of 1999 graduates whose first job (at least by 2001) was teaching. The breakdown for these graduates is as follows: 23 percent came from the “top third;” 47 percent from the “bottom third;” and 29 percent from the “middle third.” Comparing performance on entrance exams is more consistent with how private sector employers evaluate non-STEM college graduates. Those 47% of teachers scoring in the bottom third of the SAT/ACT aren't going to be in the running for very high-paying jobs almost regardless of their college performance.
        king_jester 13y ago
        > Comparing performance on entrance exams is more consistent with how private sector employers evaluate non-STEM college graduates. How exactly is that? I've not heard of an employer asking for SAT/ACT scores for college grads. I've heard of reporting GPA and talking about internship/club roles, but never standardized test scores taken before college. > Those 47% of teachers scoring in the bottom third of the SAT/ACT aren't going to be in the running for very high-paying jobs almost regardless of their college performance. Seriously? You could score in the middle or poorly on a standardized test and go on to do extremely well in college and the workforce. Further, scoring high on SAT/ACT tests doesn't indicate you will do well in college or the workforce. Employers are almost always looking for a couple of factors for potential hires, not just one, and we would expect teacher hires to be no different in that regard.

rayiner 13y ago

> Well, the notion that all existing teachers are no good is not true, so that rationale doesn't really hold up. There's two basic facts: 1) Teachers, in the U.S., are generally drawn from the bottom half of college graduates. 2) Generally, teachers get paid about as much as the average non-STEM college graduate. If the existing teachers we have are as "good as we need" then there is no reason to pay teachers more. There's no shortage of teachers at existing pay levels and teacher pay is consistent with the market pay for other college graduates of similar qualifications. Thus, those who lobby for higher teacher pay argue that it will attract more qualified people to teaching. They point to countries like Finland, where it is common for teachers to have been in the top 10% of their college classes. They note that STEM majors, who make more than non-STEM majors, take a major pay cut to go into teaching. But under that rationale, it makes no sense to pay more to existing teachers, who don't have those qualifications.

dragonwriter 13y ago
> Teachers, in the U.S., are generally drawn from the bottom half of college graduates. [citation needed] > There's no shortage of teachers at existing pay levels. The fact that a number of districts are forced to waive generally-applicable requirements (e.g., issue "emergency credentials", etc.) to get teachers and/or rely on series of long-term substitutes to assure that there is actually a teacher in the classroom suggests that this is not true
- rayiner 13y ago
  http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/do-teachers-really-come-from-the-bottom-third-of-college-graduates/2011/12/07/gIQAg8HPdO_blog.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/do-tea...
  - dragonwriter 13y ago
    So its a weakened modification (from "bottom third" to "bottom half") to a claim that, even in the weaker form, has only fairly weak justification depending on the particular time-based slice of the teacher workforce you look at, and relies on ranking college graduates not by any kind of college performance, but by college entrance exams?
    - rayiner 13y ago
      Specifically: > The appendix to the report confirms that the “top-“ and “bottom” third figures are also based on SAT/ACT scores, specifically those of 1999 graduates whose first job (at least by 2001) was teaching. The breakdown for these graduates is as follows: 23 percent came from the “top third;” 47 percent from the “bottom third;” and 29 percent from the “middle third.” Comparing performance on entrance exams is more consistent with how private sector employers evaluate non-STEM college graduates. Those 47% of teachers scoring in the bottom third of the SAT/ACT aren't going to be in the running for very high-paying jobs almost regardless of their college performance.
      - king_jester 13y ago
        > Comparing performance on entrance exams is more consistent with how private sector employers evaluate non-STEM college graduates. How exactly is that? I've not heard of an employer asking for SAT/ACT scores for college grads. I've heard of reporting GPA and talking about internship/club roles, but never standardized test scores taken before college. > Those 47% of teachers scoring in the bottom third of the SAT/ACT aren't going to be in the running for very high-paying jobs almost regardless of their college performance. Seriously? You could score in the middle or poorly on a standardized test and go on to do extremely well in college and the workforce. Further, scoring high on SAT/ACT tests doesn't indicate you will do well in college or the workforce. Employers are almost always looking for a couple of factors for potential hires, not just one, and we would expect teacher hires to be no different in that regard.