Why do I hate Teaching?!?!

ataglance wrote:" But, there is a very extensive weed-out process that also isn't in place in most private sector jobs."

The "weed out process" in the real world is called EVERY FREAKING DAY!!! You dont work X years then get a guaranteed job. What world do you live in?

Really, there's no job security at all in the "real" business world? Every day you are working with your job on the line? Sounds like hell to me.

Most people I know in the business world are not working scared like this. They feel like if they are doing a reasonable job, they have relatively good security. Believe me, there are ways of running bad teachers off, and schools do it all the time.

Probably I should stop posting on this thread, but again the criticisms of the teaching world seem to me to be false on two fronts. First, there is this strange conception that businesses are successful because they create highly competitive job environments. Obviously, this is not the case in all businesses, and it seems to me that the best businesses would have collaborative job environments.

Then, compounding the error, teaching is compared with this false picture of the "real world" by simply inverting this picture and assuming that schools have "no accountability," "no competitiveness," etc., etc.

Really, it's just a strange way to think -- totally ideological and unrelated to any concrete realities in the business world or educational world.

Old college prof has done a good job pointing to some reasons why we would want to structure educational institutions differently from business institutions. But I think to have a really fruitful conversation about how these institutions ought to be similar or different, the critics of schooling as it exists ought at least be a bit more reflective about what makes business institutions work beyond vague gestures towards "fear of losing one's job" and the "desire to be paid a lot of money."

old college math professor wrote:

The fact remains that a lot of rhetoric and teacher bashing originated several years ago with the billionaire's club. It is a documented fact that Gates has paid organisations to influence public opinion. And, they have.

Maybe teachers can be evaluated effectivly. I think they can. But, Bill Gates doesn't know what he is doing. He has clearly reversed his position numerous times, yet he has had a very pervasive influence on policy.

The average person on the street also doesn't know what they are doing. The issues in education are much deeper that what we see on the surface.

This post of yours sounds reasonable. Here are some reactions.

The fact remains that a lot of rhetoric and teacher bashing originated several years ago with the billionaire's club.

I do not know whether or not this is true. Regardless, I believe in evaluating ideas on their own merits and not on whether or not they are associated with individuals or organizations that I do/don't like.

It is a documented fact that Gates has paid organisations to influence public opinion. And, they have.

So? Wouldn't any individual who is trying to accomplish changes in public policy try to influence public opinion?

Maybe teachers can be evaluated effectivly. I think they can.

Agreed

But, Bill Gates doesn't know what he is doing. He has clearly reversed his position numerous times, yet he has had a very pervasive influence on policy.

I have no opinion on Bill Gates' ideas in general. As far as reversing himself, I would not hold that against him. Reversing oneself in the face of evidence contrary to one's original opinions strikes me as far superior to the alternative.

The average person on the street also doesn't know what they are doing. The issues in education are much deeper that what we see on the surface.

Agreed

JackOfAss wrote:

Steve Martin wrote:

The problem with merit pay is two-fold. First, you have the huge possibility of bias involved.

Second, you have the problem of fairness to all involved. .

My god.. this shows that you have ZERO experience in the real world.

Steve Martin wrote:

JackOfAss wrote:

My god.. this shows that you have ZERO experience in the real world.

uh, no. I spent the first 20 years of my adult life outside of the teaching profession. Nice ad hominem try, however.

OK. No ad whatever-you-said here. But your two-fold problem with merit pay holds for ALL merit pay systems, in every profession, public and private... If these are significant enough to warrant the abandonment of merit pay then merit pay should not be used ANYWHERE.

I suggest that your argument does not hold water.

So for all the teacher haters out there -

I am just curious as to what you think fair pay and hours for public school teachers should be.

My wife has a masters degree, generally works 7:45 a.m - 5 p.m. weekdays, and comes home and works a couple of more hours after dinner grading papers and making lesson plans that the district requires to be entered daily onto an electronic system they have recently adopted. She is required to have lunch in the cafeteria every day for 'lunch room duty.'

She is in her 12th year of teaching and makes $30,000 a year. She gets no cost of living increases.

So what would be fair for her? Would you go with $20,000? Maybe $10,000? Perhaps nothing? Fire her and you'd take her job?

Or perhaps you'd like to teach your own kids and just close the schools?

How much does she get paid in your utopia?

There is some job security in the real world, but it's entirely based on job performance. If you receive positive job reviews, are part of a successful business, and continue meeting deadlines/budgets/sales goals/etc - you're in pretty good shape. There is not, however, an arbitrary amount of time served that puts you essentially off-limits of being fired. If you start to coast once established, you can rest assure that you will not be receiving raises and you're putting your job on the line. It does not take something egregious.

Also, I'm not sure exactly what you're picturing for a "competitive environment". By that I basically mean that the best employees are rewarded for being the best, not that people are competing against each other in some cutthroat competition. Any good boss will take into account one's ability to corroborated and improve the work quality of those around them when determining the best employees. While, undoubtedly there may be some politics involved in some offices (taking credit for others work, giving bad advice to make another person look bad, etc), this could be present anywhere you have a group of people, including schools.

The same goes for merit pay. The concept is not the same as merit pay for a factory worker - $X extra for the number of widgets produced. The idea is that the better teachers would be rewarded, and will be more likely to stay in the district. The bad teachers will not be rewarded, and either will be let go, or leave on their own due to poor pay. The idea is not to improve an individual teachers output, but to improve the workforce by self selection. Having a system in place to reward exceptional work will draw more exceptional candidates to the market as well.

I think you missed the memo. The use of the word, mentally retarded, isn't appropriate anymore. It's intellectual disabilities now. Also, read up on person-first language.

I'm not sure who you're characterizing as "teacher haters". Most of the discussion has been about how silly the system is that pays teachers according to seniority over quality, and doesn't take into account subject or supply/demand for a given subject. Most of the discussions have centered around rewarding good teachers at the cost of poor/coasting teachers.

grgr wrote:

[quote]sf wrote:

She is in her 12th year of teaching and makes $30,000 a year. She gets no cost of living increases.

I call BS on this one. I doubt if there is a public school teacher in the whole country with 12 years in that only makes 30k. Even in my backwoods hillbilly coalfields school division FIRST year teachers make $34k

you teach lots of black kids i'll bet

Some very good private schools offer 5-year contracts. At the end of 5 years, a given teacher better have some professional development to offer up to either the headmaster or the board of trustees. I don't see any problem here. This approach would provide a good combination of stability and evaluation.

However, I wouldn't want to be a teacher who is subjected to the whims of a locally elected school board.

Yes, I see this, and I do think there is a place for merit pay in education. Before my current job in the university, I was an AP Physics teacher right out of college and my salary was $28k... so yeah the policies that you are talking about would have benefited me.

I guess my main worry is how to determine merit. I would want it to be determined as businesses determine merit--that is, on a local level by the people they work with who are familiar with the institution and what it needs to thrive. What scares me about the merit system is that it would be administered by state-level bureaucrats and constructed by politicians to please a general public... I'm sure businesses would be afraid of the "merit system" if it were constructed like this.

But maybe I have just thrown up a straw-man. As in the administration of all bureaucratic institutions, the devil is in the details.

In the end, you have been a fair interlocutor, grgr. I apologize for my earlier somewhat huffy posts.

No need for an apology - I deserved the huffy posts in the beginning.

I understand where you're coming from, and see those as valid concerns. As with most debates, I don't think we're too far off in our views once we got down to it. The devil is always in the details, I agree with that fully. I just don't think perfection should get in the way of good.

old college math professor wrote:

Some very good private schools offer 5-year contracts. At the end of 5 years, a given teacher better have some professional development to offer up to either the headmaster or the board of trustees. I don't see any problem here. This approach would provide a good combination of stability and evaluation.

However, I wouldn't want to be a teacher who is subjected to the whims of a locally elected school board.

That would be a very sensible approach. A 5 yr contract gives the teacher a degree of stability, but doesnt give you a permanent gig either, you have to keep getting better, or at the least stay on top of your game. It's a long enough time where one bad year or one bad crop of students wouldn't trash your reputation.

Here's what pisses me off as a taxpayer, and also as a professional. A friend of mine used to teach in City of Niagara Falls. There was a high school history teacher there who had three rolls of transparencies - one for each of 9th, 10th and 11th grade. At the beginning of each year he began turning the crank, and he didn't finish until the end of the school year.

Now, that Bozo was ripping off the taxpayers. He really had a very simple job that any monkey could do. I don't blame anyone for being upset with a teacher like that having tenure, a good retirement, etc.

think about it wrote:

I think that teachers have the idea that they could be making a lot more money "in the real world". It's a grass is greener thing. In the real world you also have to deal with bad bosses, bad customers, and you might not get good benefits. Maybe the job doesn't mesh with the personality.

I don't necessarily like teaching a lot, but there aren't really any real world jobs that appeal to me. I think that it would have been different if I had studied something different in college. Maybe I could have studied geography or geology and worked in those fields and enjoyed it.

========================

What are the "real world" jobs? My high school son told me last week that he was not yet in the real world!?

old college math professor wrote:

I know plenty of people in education that probably couldn't cut it in the "real world". But, I know even more in the real world who wouldn't last a day in an elementary classroom. Heck, I wouldn't last a day in an elementary classroom. I wouldn't last an hour in an elementary classroom in an inner city. I also know plenty of people who left the "real world" for teaching jobs, and very promptly ran back to the "real world" with their tails between their legs.

I also know plenty of people who bought into the whole "real world" idea and went into the corporate world, denying their true calling. They repented of that mistake and entered the teaching world. They laugh at the notion that teaching is easy and has no accountability. Some have since questioned the decision to teach, due to the accountability that is not accurate.

old college math professor wrote:

Our country spends approximately $1,000,000,000,000 per year on k-12 education. Ten years from now a substantial portion of this is going to go to Pearson Publishing. Come back in ten years and tell me this isn't true.

Follow the money

Reactionary wrote:

Steve Martin wrote:uh, no. I spent the first 20 years of my adult life outside of the teaching profession. Nice ad hominem try, however.

OK. No ad whatever-you-said here. But your two-fold problem with merit pay holds for ALL merit pay systems, in every profession, public and private... If these are significant enough to warrant the abandonment of merit pay then merit pay should not be used ANYWHERE.

I suggest that your argument does not hold water.

Merit pay is a joke in many other professions, too, depending on how it is done.