The Most Serious [x] Problem We Face Today

[Kepler]

Re: The Most Serious [x] Problem We Face Today

Yeah. And? What's your alternative? A 100% inheritance tax? If Successful Daddy chooses to invest in his idiot kids' future, that's his mistake to make.

A start would be for those of us who achieve highly but also started with great advantages to remember a portion of our success is due to the sheer, wonderful luck of winning the birth lottery. Every moral code in human history has stressed that.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: The Most Serious [x] Problem We Face Today

Yeah. And? What's your alternative? A 100% inheritance tax? If Successful Daddy chooses to invest in his idiot kids' future, that's his mistake to make.

Not from where I stand. But its one of many reasons to not cut education and retraining across the board...which slams those who start without 'successful daddy's money'.

 

[LynahFan]

Re: The Most Serious [x] Problem We Face Today

Not from where I stand. But its one of many reasons to not cut education and retraining across the board...which slams those who start without 'successful daddy's money'.

That's fine, and I agree that it is a proper role of government to provide access to education - so long as "funding education" doesn't turn into code for paying off public unions. Worrying about whether rich people's kids display the proper amount of humility seems like an exercise in butt-hurt that I wouldn't choose to lose sleep over.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: The Most Serious [x] Problem We Face Today

That's fine, and I agree that it is a proper role of government to provide access to education - so long as "funding education" doesn't turn into code for paying off public unions. Worrying about whether rich people's kids display the proper amount of humility seems like an exercise in butt-hurt that I wouldn't choose to lose sleep over.

Pretty much agree. I have no problem dropping unions. The trick is to make sure that not one cent of teacher income/benefits are cut...and preferbly, they increase at a rate something better than national job averages with innovative educational tools to match.

IMO when govt cuts come they should come in pretty much all other places first.

 

[St. Clown]

Re: The Most Serious [x] Problem We Face Today

Pretty much agree. I have no problem dropping unions. The trick is to make sure that not one cent of teacher income/benefits are cut...and preferbly, they increase at a rate something better than national job averages with innovative educational tools to match.

IMO when govt cuts come they should come in pretty much all other places first.

Why would you have teachers' salaries and benefits increase at a rate greater than the national job average? Right now we don't have a deficit of people looking to become teachers, we have a surfeit. From everything I hear from those who have become teachers or graduated with a teaching degree only to have to do something else because there aren't enough openings to employ them all. In economic terms, that screams out that the job has become overly attractive to the labor force.

 

[LynahFan]

Re: The Most Serious [x] Problem We Face Today

Why would you have teachers' salaries and benefits increase at a rate greater than the national job average? Right now we don't have a deficit of people looking to become teachers, we have a surfeit. From everything I hear from those who have become teachers or graduated with a teaching degree only to have to do something else because there aren't enough openings to employ them all. In economic terms, that screams out that the job has become overly attractive to the labor force.

Sure, in pure "seat filling" terms, but the larger the pool of prospective applicants, the higher the quality of the ones you do hire. If you cut pay until you get exactly the number of applicants as you have openings, then you have to accept every single applicant - including the absolute worst one.

 

[St. Clown]

Re: The Most Serious [x] Problem We Face Today

Sure, in pure "seat filling" terms, but the larger the pool of prospective applicants, the higher the quality of the ones you do hire. If you cut pay until you get exactly the number of applicants as you have openings, then you have to accept every single applicant - including the absolute worst one.

Do you really believe that we've got the highest quality teachers in our public schools currently? Because I'd like to use much of my high school years as a counter argument.

While hiring and retaining qualified teachers is an important thing to do, what 5mm argued would have done was to make the "public servant" better paid than those they serve. Continually giving them pay increases that exceed the national average is simply unsustainable. In fact, it's a ludicrous thing to say.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: The Most Serious [x] Problem We Face Today

A start would be for those of us who achieve highly but also started with great advantages to remember a portion of our success is due to the sheer, wonderful luck of winning the birth lottery. Every moral code in human history has stressed that.

Duh! and why do you think so many rich people establish foundations???

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: The Most Serious [x] Problem We Face Today

While hiring and retaining qualified teachers is an important thing to do, what 5mm argued would have done was to make the "public servant" better paid than those they serve. Continually giving them pay increases that exceed the national average is simply unsustainable. In fact, it's a ludicrous thing to say.

Really?

The math should be quite simple.

Studies talk about how there's a difference betweeen high value and low value teachers:

http://obs.rc.fas.harvard.edu/chetty/value_added.html

One teacher teaches dozens of students in a year. Students assigned to high value-added teachers are more likely to go to college, earn higher incomes, and less likely to be teenage mothers. On average, having such a teacher for one year raises a child's cumulative lifetime income by $50,000.

Now if in St Clown Land, you want to turn quality teaching prospects from the profession by cutting their pay...expect that decision to come back to you in terms of a future crappy workforce and reduced tax revenue.

Do you really believe that we've got the highest quality teachers in our public schools currently? Because I'd like to use much of my high school years as a counter argument.

You can always thank those in previous generations who wanted to cut your teachers salaries.

 

[LynahFan]

Re: The Most Serious [x] Problem We Face Today

Do you really believe that we've got the highest quality teachers in our public schools currently? Because I'd like to use much of my high school years as a counter argument.

While hiring and retaining qualified teachers is an important thing to do, what 5mm argued would have done was to make the "public servant" better paid than those they serve. Continually giving them pay increases that exceed the national average is simply unsustainable. In fact, it's a ludicrous thing to say.

I really, honestly cannot reconcile your two points: 1) teachers are bad, and 2) therefore we should cut salaries.

How on earth would you expect to have better teachers by offering less pay? I grant you that raising salaries for current teachers would certainly reward some undeserving deadwood, but the only hope for having better, smarter, more qualified, and more engaging teachers in the future is to raise salaries first in order to attract them to the profession.

 

[Kepler]

Re: The Most Serious [x] Problem We Face Today

I really, honestly cannot reconcile your two points: 1) teachers are bad, and 2) therefore we should cut salaries.

How on earth would you expect to have better teachers by offering less pay? I grant you that raising salaries for current teachers would certainly reward some undeserving deadwood, but the only hope for having better, smarter, more qualified, and more engaging teachers in the future is to raise salaries first in order to attract them to the profession.

Nah, he's right. I know when I go looking for a heart surgeon my first thought is "get me the cheapest one."

 

[MountieBoyOz]

Nah, he's right. I know when I go looking for a heart surgeon my first thought is "get me the cheapest one."

Dr. Riviera. Paging Dr. Nick Riviera.

 

[Foxton]

Re: The Most Serious [x] Problem We Face Today

Dr. Riviera. Paging Dr. Nick Riviera.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/mGYpsNpg1bw" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
HI

 

[walrus]

Re: The Most Serious [x] Problem We Face Today

but the only hope for having better, smarter, more qualified, and more engaging teachers in the future is to raise salaries first in order to attract them to the profession.

. Isn't there more to it than money?

 

[St. Clown]

Re: The Most Serious [x] Problem We Face Today

Really?

The math should be quite simple.

Studies talk about how there's a difference betweeen high value and low value teachers:

http://obs.rc.fas.harvard.edu/chetty/value_added.html

One teacher teaches dozens of students in a year. Students assigned to high value-added teachers are more likely to go to college, earn higher incomes, and less likely to be teenage mothers. On average, having such a teacher for one year raises a child's cumulative lifetime income by $50,000.

You're making an excellent point for merit pay. Until the pay structure changes, I can't support pay increases.

Now if in St Clown Land, you want to turn quality teaching prospects from the profession by cutting their pay...expect that decision to come back to you in terms of a future crappy workforce and reduced tax revenue.

I really, honestly cannot reconcile your two points: 1) teachers are bad, and 2) therefore we should cut salaries.

How on earth would you expect to have better teachers by offering less pay? I grant you that raising salaries for current teachers would certainly reward some undeserving deadwood, but the only hope for having better, smarter, more qualified, and more engaging teachers in the future is to raise salaries first in order to attract them to the profession.

How on earth do you offer greater pay for bad results? Before teachers can demand greater pay, they must produce better results. In any other job, a person can't demand a raise if that person's not delivering results. That person has to earn that raise, prove to their worth. Why should it be any different for teachers?

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/wkyeng.pdf From the BLS, a person who holds a bachelor's degree earns an average weekly paycheck of $1070 in 2011. Annualized, that's $55,640.

http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=28 The average salary for a teacher during the 2010-2011 school year was $56,069. Then when you consider that the national average for a school year is 180 days, compared with 238 work days for the rest of the nation (260 week days/year, less 7 Federal holidays, and another 15 days for vacation, vacation length assumed on my part), teachers are doing pretty well already. In fact, they're earning just over the national average, working roughly 75% of the days. If they worked the same 238 days per year as non-teachers, that would be the same hourly rate as a job paying $74,758.67/year.

Tell me again how teachers are under paid.

 

[St. Clown]

Re: The Most Serious [x] Problem We Face Today

Oh, and here's an interesting 1989 study from the State of MN's Auditor's office on teacher compensation.

http://www.auditor.leg.state.mn.us/ped/pedrep/TeacherComp.pdf

 

[LynahFan]

Re: The Most Serious [x] Problem We Face Today

Tell me again how teachers are under paid.

I haven't argued that they are underpaid, overpaid, or paid just right. I've only argued that if you want better teachers, you need to increase pay, not decrease it. Changing pay one way or the other is not likely to affect the results achieved by people who are already teaching. To improve results, we would need an entirely higher aptitude class of people in the teaching profession, and you won't get that chicken without first providing the egg of higher pay. Hoping for better results first and increasing pay later is patently ridiculous.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: The Most Serious [x] Problem We Face Today

. Isn't there more to it than money?

Every time there's a discussion like this...folks think its an either/or situation. We cut taxes or we increase spending. We cut healthcare or fund everyone. Etc, etc, etc.

Here is yet another situation where there is more than money...it can be both.

You're making an excellent point for merit pay. Until the pay structure changes, I can't support pay increases.

Tell me again how teachers are under paid.

You're positioning this all wrong.

This is not that teachers are 'underpaid'. You could probably cut teacher salaries in half and still have those unable to get jobs anywhere else signing up. But that won't help us educate the US populous.

This is not about either better evaluating teacher performance OR making sure we attract strong teachers. We need to keep teacher compensation healthy AND improve other means to get us to effective education...the outcomes are absolutely huge for American citizen quality of life, corporate international competitive health, poverty and long term govt revenues (that yes address our deficit).

The attraction of quality teachers to the profession (not just students who couldn't get a job elsewhere) is huge market driver of quality of education performance. We absolutely address other drivers...but we don't walk away from some drivers of education success just because we aren't happy with some other driver.

 

[Kepler]

Re: The Most Serious [x] Problem We Face Today

Dr. Riviera. Paging Dr. Nick Riviera.

 

[geezer]

Re: The Most Serious [x] Problem We Face Today

But that won't help us educate the US populous.

lol. We gotta get that populous educated.