If money were no object and if I were Queen of Education, here is what I would do.
5. Pay teachers more. Many of our most ambitious “best and brightest” at the universities don’t go into teaching because it doesn’t pay enough.
4. Pay teachers enough so that we don’t need the union for collective bargaining for salary.
3. Pay teachers more because we lose so many great teachers to administration or other fields when they realize they can’t support a family on a teacher’s salary.
Now that I’ve made my point about the money, I can move on to the more important issues.
2. I know this one won’t be popular among parents and students, but I would get rid of Running Start and offer more college options at all high schools. At low-income, high needs schools, we lose many of our top students to the free college credits available through Running Start, which impacts the morale and achievement level at our school, as many of those kids are both social and academic leaders. I also resent that my tax money is being used to pay for other people’s children to go to college, when in most cases the only thing they're getting from the college that they can’t get at the high school is college credit.
1. I would revamp our entire grading system so that it matches our assessment system. There would be two separate grades – one for content mastery and one for work ethic and/or attendance and/or employability and/or student-like behavior. The grade for content mastery would reflect what so many of us are doing already – assessing whether the student is at, above, or below standards. I know that many elementary schools do this already, but I haven’t heard of any secondary schools that are. All of our staff development classes, all best practices recommend that we grade students using rubrics that reflect standards. Yet I still have to convert that into a percentile grade in order to use the district-mandated computer grading system.
Evin, you have a different perspective than I’ve heard before. Teachers, as altruists, teach in spite of the lower pay. Like other artists, we suffer for our art. I like the idea of that until we lose highly qualified candidates who need more money so they can afford to have children with a stay-at-home parent.
Honestly, I actually don’t mind the fact that teachers aren’t paid “enough.” Sure, it would be nice to have a few more extra bucks, but it really is not the most important thing in the world. In fact, I would venture to say that I’ve seen many of my friends go into JOBS (versus careers) that they couldn’t stand, just because it pays well. That kinda stinks too. If teachers got paid more (however, you care to define what more is), then we would see an increase in teachers who were incompetent in the classroom. I would actually go further and say that because teachers don’t get paid enough, then it helps weed out people who REALLY don’t want to teach. As a new teacher (this is my second year), I love the fact that I get paid to do something I love. Isn’t that enough? Probably not for veteran teachers. But for us, newbies in the professions — it’s pretty sweet.
This is the first time I’ve ever heard anyone speak out against Running Start. I think you have an outstanding idea and I’m glad you brought it up. I’ll share my take on the program I’ve seen in 3 different states over the last 20 years or so since the inauguration of the program.
At the onset, it seemed like a good idea. An exceptional student could go to the community college for a course not offered at the HS, Japanese language, for example. Then, students could take more courses at the college but had to choose – either college credit or HS credit. We all know what happened after that – I can tell far more stories of kids getting messed over with credits than I can tell success stories. I don’t want to write a long comment….. perhaps this topic warrants a post?
You know, Kristin, it’s funny how split I am. I actually agree with everything you wrote about job satisfaction vs. salary. I took a huge cut in pay when I entered into teaching as a mid-life career change, and I wouldn’t change it for the world. But I still struggle with the number of young teachers who leave the field (or some who never enter it) because of the money issue. Up until this real estate market crashed, it was an almost impossible feat for teachers to buy a house, big or small, in King County. I have colleagues who commute over an hour each way because the houses that they were able to afford are so far away. Does a teacher living in Yakima who earns what I earn need more money? Probably not. Maybe the answer is a housing allowance that equalizes the standard of living in Omak and Seattle. I only know that two of the best young teachers at my school are going to the “dark side” of administration so that they can afford to have children. There’s definitely something wrong with that scenario.
I have to make jokes about retirement age, since I didn’t start teaching until I was 40. I figure I have to teach until I’m about 85 before I can retire comfortably…
Bravo on the frustration with striking for more pay. It doesn’t look like our union is going that route, but I was nervous. Maybe the unions should start putting their negotiating weight behind the issues that really impact whether or not we’re successful at what we do.
You make good points about the continuing education required of teachers, but I guess I would put that under non-pay benefits. I agree that teachers shouldn’t have to pay for the continuing education required of us, that we shouldn’t have to pay $2400 to pursue a national board certification, and that being expected to change the lives of 150 students a year is a little unrealistic. I just don’t group those issues under salary. I know there are many jobs out there that pay more – with a bachelors – than I earn with my masters, but do I want to sit in a cubicle and do the corporate thing? No. Do I want to try to sell something, or make someone a profit? No. There’s a small price we pay for going to bed on Sunday night looking forward to Monday morning, and that price seems to be around $30,000 a year. I’m willing to pay that to have a job that gives me as much satisfaction as a garage full of expensive toys, a bigger house, or the ability to eat out seven nights a week. I know not all teachers feel that way, but I know some do, and many of my lucratively employed friends envy me that I don’t have to wait for Saturday to start living.
Brian made a really good point on my post about the inevitable burn-out when teachers have to teach until 65 to reach retirement. It would be great if teachers could move in and out of the classroom – if sabbaticals were more available – in order to hang on to that optimism and postitive attitude so many of us begin our careers with. Imagine being able to go teach abroad every few years, or work in a lab, or on a farm. Think of the skills and understanding teachers would be able to bring back into the classroom.
Kristin, I think the “best and brightest” are the kids who have the most potential and ambition to go out and change the world. Frequently, we find them in honors classes, and sometimes we find them on the drop-out list. Very few of the kids who graduate from my school plan on going into teaching, and one of the main reasons they cite is money.
I disagree that we earn enough, although, the second bullet on my list is directly related to the frustration I feel with my local EA right now, which is compaigning very hard for a strike. In these economic times, we all have to be tightening our belts – both at the district level and at the personal level.
I do think it’s a myth that we have summers off, when so many of us have to take classes to keep our certification, or teach summer school in order to pay our bills. My daughter (who was a National Merit semi-finalist) wanted to be a teacher for a while because she saw how much I love my job. But when she started comparing starting salaries, she changed her mind, and her first job out of college – with a bachelor’s degree – garnered her a higher salary than I get with a master’s degree. Plus, her employer pays for any continuing education that she chooses, whether it’s related to her job or not.
I am also not as optimistic about the general quality of teachers as you and Travis are. I suppose I’m way too cynical, and there is probably no higher ratio of incompetent teachers as there is in any other field. But I know more than a couple people who went into teaching because they didn’t feel they were smart enough to do anything else. However, I truly do love and respect the optimism and positive attitude that argues against me.
J Broekman, what I like about standards-based grading is that it is black and white. Students either make standard or they don’t. Whether or not that should be an impediment to graduate from high school is a great discussion. I have had kids with low IQ’s who don’t qualify for SpEd programs because there is no discrepancy between their achievement and their IQ. However, because of their work ethic and they will make great employees, which could be reflected in a second grade mark that reflects everything but content that we require from students. That way we could still be sending a strong message to their future teachers (or employers).
I hear the “best and brightest” thing a lot. Who are these people? The best scientific minds go into research, medicine, or chemical engineering because of the great pay? Maybe, but more likely they do it because the field is interesting to them or they don’t want to be with kids all day. The best and the brightest writers become writers because it pays more? I don’t think so. Journalists? They earn less than some teachers. The best artists become artists or architects? Those professions don’t pay better, have fewer benefits and last twelve months a year. Being an attorney, a real estate mogul or a programmer pays more but probably wouldn’t appeal to someone who wants to work with kids and make a difference in the world, and teaching a skill is not the same as being great at a skill.
I work with two local teacher education programs and there are plenty of “best and brightest” going into education. Do new teachers get burned out? Yes, but I don’t think it’s because of pay. Non-pay conditions definitely need to be improved. I also think the worst teachers would stay for far less money because no one is threatening their incompetence with dismissal, and that’s the biggest job perk there is. Teachers get paid very well. I argue that paying teachers double won’t change anything but society’s expectations of us, when we aren’t really meeting them as they are, which leads me directly into how fantastic Travis’s post about the quality of teaching is.
J. Broekman: Your last paragraph is a strong case in my mind for revamping the “final certification” which schools offer. When everyone earns the same diploma (the kid with autism who struggled to just endure the other 30 kids in the room as well as the privileged, well-supported natural student who coasted to a 4.0 with moderate effort) that diploma is less meaningful. I think schools should offer different degrees of the diploma. I haven’t fully thought through this idea, but in its present catch-all incarnation the high school diploma is a mere token of time served.
I don’t think paying teachers more will eliminate the need for unions. There are so many different ways an administration can attempt to make teachers’ lives miserable that there will always be a need for collective bargaining.
The problem with the current pay scale for teachers is that it’s enough to keep the incompetents from finding another job, but not enough to attract the brightest stars during an economic boom. If non-pay conditions were better, if teachers weren’t the one adult alone with 30 kids for an entire day, if collaboration were more than a buzzword applied to sharing photocopying duties, if teachers could make a difference beyond their classroom without leaving the classroom, if improving your skills was rewarded without penalizing those who point out flaws in the system, we would lose fewer good teachers to attrition. But turning those grand ideas into a contract that can withstand the society tolerance for mean-spirited selfishness is beyond my ability. And my pay grade.:)
I’m all for revamping grading to reflect standards, rather than seat time and plugging through. Part of the resistance will be from those who teach lower functioning students who pass their classes based on plugging through without ever fully meeting the standards. Some of this is developmental. A kid with a 60 IQ will probably never fully understand the 12th grade standards, no matter how brilliant the teachers are, because good 12th grade standards require abstract, constructive thought. An autistic kid is probably not going to meet all of the standards on time, because so much effort needs to be spent on the social skills other children pick up by imitation, but could meet the standards if we didn’t insist that everyone graduate at age 18.
Well, I know I’m the minority in this opinion, but I think teachers get paid pretty well. Sorry. I love my job, I work nine months of the year, and if I work smart I don’t take loads and loads of work home. And I have to say, when I was in high school I got really sick of hearing my teachers complain about their pay. So, getting paid more is waaaaaaay down on my personal wish list for what would make my job better.
I agree the grading system is useless. It’s totally meaningless. There’s no consistency between schools or districts, or even within a building between teachers of the same subject. An A doesn’t mean a whole lot, and I often feel like the C I give a child is useless when, down the hall, he would have earned an A. Plus, how many of you have seniors come around in the weeks before graduation begging you to raise a grade they earned years before so that their core gpa is high enough to graduate? That kills me.
I’m torn on the Running Start issue. I see what you’re saying about it pulling student leaders off of campus. When I was a student we had a professor come to my high school two days a week to teach political science. I earned college credit for that, and didn’t have to leave high school. Maybe that’s a model that would work? One thing I love about Running Start is that it helps break the cycle of poverty. Kids who have plenty of money for college probably won’t go the community college route just because it’s free. I don’t mind my tax dollars going to help a student be the first in his family to graduate from college, and to do that without incurring a massive debt.
I completely agree with items 3 – 5. Enough already with the debate: we need to pay teachers more!
And your points about Running Start are right on. Taxpayers don’t realize that they are paying for college for some students, and there is a negative impact on the classroom when those particular independent, high achievers leave for Running Start. It would make so much more sense to provide college credit options within the high school!
Finally someone who agrees with me about running start! Presently in our building we lose a huge chunk of our Jr and Sr classes to running start, and the vast majority end up returning, credit deficient, because they didn’t know what they were getting into…they though that because they passed the test to get in that they were “ready” for the independence and responsibility of running start. I have seen very, very few students who have truly excelled in running start, so the early college option needs to be offered, but not offered so broadly. I had students who couldn’t pass the WASL who passed the running start entrance exam and tried to go (we talked her out of it). Our counselors and admin have to work overtime to serve those kids who don’t pass their running start classes, end up out of sync timewise and off the credit path to graduation.
I think it should be much tougher to get into running start, and students should have to pay to come back to their regular school if they don’t make it through the term.
I concur with the grading system revamping. I have lived through endless workshops on standards and rubrics (all which were good), but, in the end, the report card did not reflect the philosophy the district was promoting. It is too bad. It would be an easy change and it would be a bit more than a first order change.
I think two things are holding us back from this change. (1) is the fear of what parents will say when they have a system they don’t understand–at first. (2) is the complaining that teachers will give about the new system taking more work.
Sad.
What are your suggestions for getting parents and teachers past this block?