Be A Teacher Be a Fool

Off Topic
121

People starting at $28,000 are NOT going to cause our educational system to be reborn. It will simply drift lower and lower (sound familiar?)

Here’s what teachers should be paid:

Beginning pay = The starting average for a fresh engineer in computer or chemical. This would be in the low 50’s.

Raises = from $1000 to $2500 per year, based on performance, for 20 years. This means that a good teacher makes about $100,000/year, after 20 years. Given that person has educated thousands of young men and women by then, its well worth it.

Raises after that tied to inflation or availability of funds.

Do the above, or suffer the consequences. Cause and effect.

122

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
People starting at $28,000 are NOT going to cause our educational system to be reborn. It will simply drift lower and lower (sound familiar?)

Here’s what teachers should be paid:

Beginning pay = The starting average for a fresh engineer in computer or chemical. This would be in the low 50’s.

…[/quote]

Bullshit. A teaching degree is
far easier to acquire than a Chem. E. degree. Teachers work less hours than Chemical Engineers. Teachers have much better job security than Chemical Engineers.

I could go on and on why Chemical Engineers should earn far more money than teachers without getting market forces.

If you don’t like your pay get a different job.

123

I debated replying to this post for quite awhile simply because I am a school teacher (with dreams of teaching at the college level), and I didn’t want to respond out of anger for being indirectly called a ‘fool’ for my chosen profession.

I’ll start with the potentially sensitive pay issue. I’ll try to frame it this way: differences between group A (teachers, and I’m assuming policemen, firefighters, etc.) and group B (lawyers, doctors, etc.) is that while all professions make comparable starting salaries, the potential for greater salaries is MUCH greater with group B professions. Group B WILL eventually see 6 figures in their paycheck. Group A NEVER will. With all this said, while I’ll generally agree that teachers are underpaid, it’s all relative. Teachers definitely make enough money to have a decent living. Even when I get to the college level, my salary will probably not be that much greater from teaching in high school. I’m inclined to think that young teachers nowadays know what they’re getting into with regards to their pay. I know I did, so I won’t/don’t complain much about my individual salary. Also, average statistics, while factual, don’t necessarily reflect reality. For example, I worked in Denver last year, and between rent & utilities, I paid $635/month. I now work as a part-time (.8) teacher in Long Island, and despite being .8, make almost the same amount as last year. Rent & utilities is now $870/month. Cost of living as well as average salary, varies greatly depending on where you live, at least for a teacher. As far as benefits go, they vary greatly depending on the school district, and probably range from comparable to the benefits of other professions, to being greater/lesser.

Now moving onto the vacation times of teachers (I mentioned this in another thread). Some people seem to assume that it’s nice for teachers to get all the time off that they do, and that they actually DO go on vacation (do no work) during that time. Of all the teachers I know, I’m only aware of a minority that actually do no work during that time. The ones that do vacation are usually married and have a nice combined income with their spouse. Most teachers I know, especially young, single ones, either work second jobs (coaching, bartending, sales, etc. - all year round, I may add) or are attending graduate school, which is exactly what I do every summer. Heck, let’s look at this week, which I have off for winter break. I visited the folks for 3 days over the weekend. When I returned to my apartment, I’ve done nothing but do work related to either school or graduate school. In fact, I’m actually going into school tomorrow to do even more work. Furthermore, teachers regularly bring their work home with them. Not occasionally, but regularly.

Also, I’ve seen a few posters mention that most teachers are terrible or that VERY few people can teach. While I don’t necessarily agree, with these statements, obviously there ARE poor teachers out there, just as there are great ones. If you think about it, this idea applies to ALL professions. There are good/great (insert profession here) everywhere, just as there are poor ones. Be as honest as possible, how good are YOU at your own profession? Average? Above average? Below average? Regardless of the answer, what are YOU doing to become better at your profession? Graduate classes? Seeking advice from colleagues? Reading books? Nothing?

Also, what constitutes a good teacher from a bad teacher? This is a very difficult question that I suspect deserves its own thread, and would get a few dozen different answers. I know that caring about the students & your job is not enough, because my experience in Denver last year screams otherwise. Another question I have is that of the teachers you’ve had in your life that you consider ‘poor’, did you learn anything from them? I found a few teachers to be poor in college, but I will admit that I learned quite a bit from them.

Personally, I think changes in the train of thought that dominate society nowadays have contributed greatly to the effectiveness of teachers, in a negative way. My dad and his peers will share stories of ‘the ruler’, and how a call home to the parents meant punishment of some sort. Nowadays, if I used ‘the ruler’, I would get sued (and probably lose), and when I call home, either the parent is supportive of either me or his/her child. Usually, no severe punishment is involved.

I hope this post made at least a little bit of sense. I would be curious as to Shug’s thoughts on all the above, since he used to be a teacher. Where are you Shugart?

124

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
People starting at $28,000 are NOT going to cause our educational system to be reborn. It will simply drift lower and lower (sound familiar?)

Here’s what teachers should be paid:

Beginning pay = The starting average for a fresh engineer in computer or chemical. This would be in the low 50’s.

Raises = from $1000 to $2500 per year, based on performance, for 20 years. This means that a good teacher makes about $100,000/year, after 20 years. Given that person has educated thousands of young men and women by then, its well worth it.

Raises after that tied to inflation or availability of funds.

Do the above, or suffer the consequences. Cause and effect.[/quote]

But the teacher gets an extra 12-14 WEEKS off/year. You’re not considering that that has a financial value. Who’s going to pay for those $100,000/year 9-month employees? How much more do you want us to pay in property taxes so you can be paid for 14 weeks that you don’t work?

125

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
People starting at $28,000 are NOT going to cause our educational system to be reborn. It will simply drift lower and lower (sound familiar?)

Here’s what teachers should be paid:

Beginning pay = The starting average for a fresh engineer in computer or chemical. This would be in the low 50’s.

…

Bullshit. A teaching degree is
far easier to acquire than a Chem. E. degree. Teachers work less hours than Chemical Engineers. Teachers have much better job security than Chemical Engineers.

I could go on and on why Chemical Engineers should earn far more money than teachers without getting market forces.

If you don’t like your pay get a different job.

[/quote]

My wife is a university professor, so what I earn is not a big deal.

Who taught the chemical engineers? They wouldn’t even exist w/o some dedicated hs teacher behind them.

Do you honestly think that working with chemicals or designing some new motherboard is more important that educating thousands of children? LOL! It is, at the very least, equal to or MORE important.

126

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
…

My wife is a university professor, so what I earn is not a big deal.
[/quote]

So is mine.

Other engineers presented the subject material and it was up to me to learn. Some of the “dedicated” teachers stood up and read the book verbatim for the whole class period. There was not much teaching happening.

While I have worked in many areas my primary focus has been pollution control and drinking water. Without clean water no one would live. I should be paid more than Bill Gates.

School bus drivers and crossing guards protect the lives of children everyday. Perhaps they should be paid more than teachers?

There are a lot of weak teachers out there. There are some truly horrible teachers out there. In my experience the truly excellent dedicated teacher is rarer than hens teeth.

Long ago teachers banded together to form unions to negotiate contracts. This gives the excellent teacher no more bargaining opportunity than the shitty teacher when it comes ways to make more money.

Dissolve the union and have the school systems bid for your service. Perhaps some teachers will make a lot more money and the shitty ones won’t get rehired.

127

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
People starting at $28,000 are NOT going to cause our educational system to be reborn. It will simply drift lower and lower (sound familiar?)

Here’s what teachers should be paid:

Beginning pay = The starting average for a fresh engineer in computer or chemical. This would be in the low 50’s.

…

Bullshit. A teaching degree is
far easier to acquire than a Chem. E. degree. Teachers work less hours than Chemical Engineers. Teachers have much better job security than Chemical Engineers.

I could go on and on why Chemical Engineers should earn far more money than teachers without getting market forces.

If you don’t like your pay get a different job.

My wife is a university professor, so what I earn is not a big deal.

Who taught the chemical engineers? They wouldn’t even exist w/o some dedicated hs teacher behind them.

Do you honestly think that working with chemicals or designing some new motherboard is more important that educating thousands of children? LOL! It is, at the very least, equal to or MORE important.

[/quote]

In 1999 there are 3.3 million public school teachers in America. http://www.census.gov/prod/2002pubs/01statab/educ.pdf
In 1998 (most recent year I could find stats on) there were 1.46 million engineers (of all kinds). http://www.census.gov/prod/2002pubs/01statab/science.pdf
Now based on supply & demand, who do you think will make more?

If the job were so damn tough, there wouldn’t be over 3 million people doing it. Rather than bitch about not getting 12 months pay for 9 months work, why don’t you just get a year round job?

128

[quote]dollarbill44 wrote:

I disagree with this philosophy completely. I also disagree with the urgency with which people promote standardized testing as a means to evaluate schools. As anyone who has kids in school…

DB [/quote]

I guess I wasn’t very clear in my post, I don’t think we should copy the same system as China, I just want to add some of the competitiveness into the education system.

I don’t think this is a valid arguement, because these universities attract the top minds in the world. These guys are like the top 0.5% of the population and I doubt that teachers had a huge influence in their education. I’m pretty sure anyone who majored in math or engineering know that a lot of profs are not from North America.

129

[quote]reddog6376 wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
People starting at $28,000 are NOT going to cause our educational system to be reborn. It will simply drift lower and lower (sound familiar?)

Here’s what teachers should be paid:

Beginning pay = The starting average for a fresh engineer in computer or chemical. This would be in the low 50’s.

Raises = from $1000 to $2500 per year, based on performance, for 20 years. This means that a good teacher makes about $100,000/year, after 20 years. Given that person has educated thousands of young men and women by then, its well worth it.

Raises after that tied to inflation or availability of funds.

Do the above, or suffer the consequences. Cause and effect.

But the teacher gets an extra 12-14 WEEKS off/year. You’re not considering that that has a financial value. Who’s going to pay for those $100,000/year 9-month employees? How much more do you want us to pay in property taxes so you can be paid for 14 weeks that you don’t work?

[/quote]

You’re making the same mistake many others make: you can’t measure teaching like flipping burgers. I am not producing a uniform product; I am producing educated human beings. That is NOT an assemblyline process and can’t be judged as so.

Do you understand what it means to get someone to learn? This doesn’t just happen by magic. It requires a lot of thought. How do you quantify that?

But, being practical: want a good education? Pay teachers a good salary. Fire all the administrators (and congressmen who put them there with their bs mandated programs). Let teachers teach. Let teachers simply remove an idiot from class who refuses to learn. Want to sue a teacher for removing some shithead from class? Make it not possible to sue for such nonsense.

Man, there is so much that could be improved, but it won’t be done with standardized tests, lengthening the school year, or other such stupidities being foisted on the public. And the place to begin this is with the cash.

130

[quote]reddog6376 wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
People starting at $28,000 are NOT going to cause our educational system to be reborn. It will simply drift lower and lower (sound familiar?)

Here’s what teachers should be paid:

Beginning pay = The starting average for a fresh engineer in computer or chemical. This would be in the low 50’s.

…

Bullshit. A teaching degree is
far easier to acquire than a Chem. E. degree. Teachers work less hours than Chemical Engineers. Teachers have much better job security than Chemical Engineers.

I could go on and on why Chemical Engineers should earn far more money than teachers without getting market forces.

If you don’t like your pay get a different job.

My wife is a university professor, so what I earn is not a big deal.

Who taught the chemical engineers? They wouldn’t even exist w/o some dedicated hs teacher behind them.

Do you honestly think that working with chemicals or designing some new motherboard is more important that educating thousands of children? LOL! It is, at the very least, equal to or MORE important.

In 1999 there are 3.3 million public school teachers in America. http://www.census.gov/prod/2002pubs/01statab/educ.pdf
In 1998 (most recent year I could find stats on) there were 1.46 million engineers (of all kinds). http://www.census.gov/prod/2002pubs/01statab/science.pdf
Now based on supply & demand, who do you think will make more?

If the job were so damn tough, there wouldn’t be over 3 million people doing it. Rather than bitch about not getting 12 months pay for 9 months work, why don’t you just get a year round job?
[/quote]

Because I love what I do. Only someone who has little passion for their work could write ‘just get a year round job’. Uh, yeah…

131

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
… I am producing educated human beings. …

[/quote]

This is the cornerstone of your mistake. You are not producing anything.

You are providing a service by presenting subject material to these kids. You did not produce these kids.

It is up to the kids to learn it or not.

It is kind of funny that you always argue against taxes etc. with your Objectivist philosphy yet you make you living directly from taxes and would like to see the tax burden increased in order to increase your salary.

Methinks if Atlas shrugged you would be in trouble.

132

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Because I love what I do. Uh, yeah…
[/quote]

if you love what you do why complain about the money? do you love money or your job?

if making more money is important to you then find a profession that pays more…

133

[quote]

Fire all the administrators (and congressmen who put them there with their bs mandated programs). Let teachers teach. Let teachers simply remove an idiot from class who refuses to learn. Want to sue a teacher for removing some shithead from class? Make it not possible to sue for such nonsense. [/quote]

Now that I can agree with.

134

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
People starting at $28,000 are NOT going to cause our educational system to be reborn. It will simply drift lower and lower (sound familiar?)

Here’s what teachers should be paid:

Beginning pay = The starting average for a fresh engineer in computer or chemical. This would be in the low 50’s.

…

Bullshit. A teaching degree is
far easier to acquire than a Chem. E. degree. Teachers work less hours than Chemical Engineers. Teachers have much better job security than Chemical Engineers.

I could go on and on why Chemical Engineers should earn far more money than teachers without getting market forces.

If you don’t like your pay get a different job.

[/quote]

Although I’m not here to argue about whether an engineer or teacher should earn more, there are some errors in this reasoning.
First, the reason a teaching degree is easier to get is because the level of people applying to licensure programs is lower because the pay is lower. It’s often funny when I hear a teacher say “teachers don’t get paid enough-we need to go on strike” and all the time I am thinking to myself “yes, teachers should get paid more, but you would not be one of them.” If pay went up, then my guess would be 33% of the teachers today should be out the door, replaced by more qualified teachers. The upper 33% today are probably very qualified and devoted and the middle 33% today would do a better job if they didn’t have the lower 33% fighting for lower expectations.

I went through the other science teachers in my department today and here’s what I found out about their level of ed.

  1. Biology teacher: BS biology, Masters science education.

  2. Biology teacher: BS biology, MS environmental studies and MS forestry. 5 years field experience as a Forest Ranger.

  3. Biology teacher: BS biology, Master in eductation.

  4. Physics teacher: BS biology, MS Geophysics, MS Paleontolgy. 20 years field experience as a geological surveyor.

  5. Chemistry teacher: BS Pre-med, MS Psychology.

  6. Chemistry/physical science teacher: BS Geology, MS Chemistry.

  7. Chem/Physical science teacher: BS Biology, MS Kinesiology, MLS Eductaion

  8. Physics and physical science teacher: BS Geology, MS Geological engineering, MS Education in progress + 20 years field experience as a geological engineer.

We also have a couple of part time and in flux positions but the three teachers in those areas all have masters, and two are pure science.

Note that these are not Science Ed degrees unless stated as such. This is pretty much par for my district, if not a little below the typical science department in this district. None of these teachers got their license until after an initial BS in science and most have a hard science masters as well. Some of these teachers were engineers.

Yet my point was, that if you pay teachers the same as engineers-fine, but the ed programs need to get more selective and BETTER. What I learned in getting my MLS in education (aside from the student teaching experience) could have been summarized on a 3 x 5 index card. Everything else I learned by myself.

THE ED PROGRAMS are so damn easy because with current salaries, if they were any more challenging or more selective there would be an immense teacher shortage. There are already projections of a nationwide teacher shortage in the next 6-8 years that will force states to grant emergency licenses for about 1/3 of the teaching positions nationwide, and to anyone with a BS or BA. If salaries don’t go up, I’m sending my kids to private schools because if not, even in the best district they are going to be taught by some 6 year BA in philosophy or sociology who’s still living in a frat house.

135

And also, I checked my home computer files and I have written 772 original pages for my science classes since July 15th 2005, all at home not on school time. This is probably about 400 hours of development. Then again, if the textbooks didn’t suck I wouldn’t have to write my own.

136

[quote]reddog6376 wrote:
In 1999 there are 3.3 million public school teachers in America. http://www.census.gov/prod/2002pubs/01statab/educ.pdf
In 1998 (most recent year I could find stats on) there were 1.46 million engineers (of all kinds). http://www.census.gov/prod/2002pubs/01statab/science.pdf
Now based on supply & demand, who do you think will make more?
[/quote]

Um, lets see… Well, if you had given any information about the DEMAND half of the equation, you might be able to tell. You see, you need to know BOTH supply AND demand to answer that question. Your highschool economics teacher must have been a moron.

The job IS easy because the unions lower the expectations and standards. You can work at a very minimal level and they won’t be able to get rid of you unless you are dangerous.

The job is HARD if you work at the level that I as a parent would hope that a teacher would work at, and at the level that the devoted teachers do work at. The problem here is that sinking to the minimal level is contagious. When you’ve got the union banner wavers telling you that you need to be out the door 5 minutes after the last class is over because that’s what our level of pay is based on. I have had a union rep tell me this! Also, you can’t pay teachers based on performance because it just gets too complicated. If its based on a crappy state test, then do you want teachers teaching to that test? Also, are you going to be willing to take a remedial class if those kids test scores are going to be assigned to you.

137

[quote]mertdawg wrote:
If pay went up, then my guess would be 33% of the teachers today should be out the door, replaced by more qualified teachers. The upper 33% today are probably very qualified and devoted and the middle 33% today would do a better job if they didn’t have the lower 33% fighting for lower expectations.

[/quote]

Dead on.

138

Didn’t New York City come up with a program to reward teachers on merit? I remember reading about it in Rudy’s book “Leadership”.
That seems kind of contrary to the idea that you can’t create a way to pay teachers on merit because it is too complicated.
The only problem with the NYC plan-The teachers union shut it down! I have another client who was a big wig at ETS who told me that about 10 years ago, NYC tested all its teachers and found a significant number couldn’t even pass the states basic skills tests that ETS designed. More than a dozen teachers were removed for cheating!

Also, what about vouchers, if public education is so good, why not offer vouchers to parents who want to send their kids to private schools. If teachers work so hard and so many are so good, then vouchers really shouldn’t be a problem, because why would a parent take their kid out of a public school for a more expensive and inferior product? In Princeton, which supposedly has some of the best public schools in the state, any parent that can afford to send their kid to Hun, PDS, Lawrenceville, or Peddie does so in a second. It is even a bigger push to leave the public school system in the elementary level. Most parents who have boys can’t wait to get their kids out of the elementary public school system. Several of my clients have claimed that the public schools are incompetent at teaching boys, with the education system now incredibly biased to girls.

My opinion is that the public schools in New Jersey breed mediocrity. I have 2 friends in particular who were excellent elementary school teachers in the esteemed west Windsor school district, who left the profession because they felt the administration and their coworkers, were in their own words, mediocre.

Both my friends now work as private tutors, granted they make more money but they don’t get 180 days off a year (working Saturdays as a rule and not an exception), often times working more hours per day in the summers with challenged students. The also don’t get fully paid medical benefits either, but both say it is worth it cause they don’t have to go back to the public school system.

139

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Magarhe wrote:

  1. you need incentives set right - aimed at students

  2. you need an environment conducive to learning

You can’t get good results unless there is a reward for achieving results - an incentive.

Paying teachers does NOT give an incentive.

Paying STUDENTS is what you have to do.

along with tons of other random useless tidbits

This is the dumbest thing I’ve heard since JeffR last posted. The last thing kids today need is anymore coddling just so they actually do what they are supposed to do in the first place.

Paid to learn? My incentive for going to class was so I would not end up like more than half of the guys in my old neighborhood and find myself in jail or dead by the age of 21. The incentive was the possibility of actually having a well paying job in the future.

One of the areas we have screwed up worse than any other is this new trend to avoid damaging these poor little fucks’ self esteem. They completely fuck up an essay assignment…let’s not fail them because that will make them feel bad. Let’s give them a smiley face sticker and one sad face sticker so they know to do better but that they are still great people on the inside.

I see a world of future losers once the school system starts paying students to do their own damn work.[/quote]

Prof X you seem to have a real chip on your shoulder, it sounds like you’re still pissed off at all the kids at school who had more money than you, not just from this but from other posts you’ve made. You haven’t read my post properly and blown it away because it upset your chippy shoulder.

I AM NOT SAYING PAY THEM ALL MONEY TO ATTEND SCHOOL AND BE LITTLE SHITS.

I am saying pay them for achieving results, set them up to understand that learning can improve their life. This doesn’t have to be paying them to realise this, it should be taught to them by their parents, they should understand that learning can improve their situation in life and they should be SELF MOTIVATED to get off their ass and learn, not sit around giving cheek to the teacher.

And the last part of my post suggested giving the teacher a big stick to smack their smartass into line, AS WHAT USED TO HAPPEN.

Because really the schools now are mostly minding centres for delinquents who are destined to be unskilled and unemployable in a country with diminishing manufacturing and a faltering economy.

You think society demands that people need to learn too much? Well move those kids to China and work in the sweatshops where they belong if they don’t want to learn.

Alternatively, get busted for petty crimes, plea bargain your way into jail and work in THAT sweatshop, because the USA has a massive network of prison sweatshops, it’s big business, run by people who did do some learnin’.

A country full of lazy kids who won’t learn or behave complaining, getting fat and whinging that there are no jobs, and it is too much learnin’ to do these days, and acting tough. Great. I wonder what the future will be.

There is no way paying teachers more is going to fix this.

If you paid them $250,000 pa it STILL wouldn’t fix this.

Carrot or stick, applied to the kids.

140

OK, I’ll bite on this one finally. As a teacher of 7 years in a public school, I will outline what I see as some of the issues that affect the quality of current public education.

#1-Work for pay: Unlike most other jobs in the world, you are not paid for your overtime. I coached basketball, volleyball and track and field. On away game nights, I would arrive at school at 7:00 am and get home at 1:00 am (18 hours straight) only to get up at 6:00 am and return to the school and head off to a weekend tourney right after school that night for the weekend to spend my own money on hotels, meals away from home, and meals for kids with no money. My financial compensation… $0.

#2-Lack of support: The tail wags the dog in our school system. Kids know that teachers only have the illusion (a transaprent one at that) of power. Kids know that they will not suffer any real consequences to their bonehead actions so they act like a$$holes and show a complete lack of respect for their school, their administrators, their teachers, their peers and themselves. I was scared sh*tless of the strap (and my dad) when I was a kid, what are kids scared of now? 1/2 of the time the administrators back the kids for fear of action from the family against the school, the teacher, or themselves. At this point I think that bringing back the strap is one of the few cures that might fix a weakening system. I once heard a good quote “99 percent of kids fear the strap, the other 1 percent fear nothing”. Life would be a lot easier if I only had to straighten out that 1 percent on regular occasion.

#3-Lack of recognition: When I started in teaching I took kids to a week long basketball camps at an NCAA Div 1 school (10+ hours away) for a week of my summer (on my own dime), to Hawaii over spring break for a track camp (again paid for myself) coached 30+ basketball games per year, fundraised for new uniforms, extra tourneys, the list goes on…after five years of this I went from being a former university athlete myself to a fat bastard, and for what? Not once did I get a letter of recognition, a thank you card, or anything from the school. The kids were awesome and I have no complaints with them or the way I was treated by their families. They made my year by taking me out to dinner, many thanks, gifts, etc. I was treated like gold by the kids and their families. After a while I had to take an honest look at MY LIFE and question why I was giving up my goals, time with my family and friends, and money. For what? To chase after the greater good? After 5 years I looked around the school and watched other people arrive late, leave early and collect a paycheck that was significantly larger than mine. Until schools can pay based on teacher performance, I will have a difficult time sacrificing my valuable time for no reward.

Why on earth would any intelligent, university graduate work very long hours, with no recognition, in a difficult work environment, under constant scrutiny, for a small salary?

Most of the time the arguement that those who are not in the system present is the fact that teachers have such great holidays and short work days. Well, you get what you pay for right? I have no problem with what I make if the only expectation is that I show up, do my job while I am there, and leave when the kids do. There seems to be the expectation of greatness, on a pay scale that appears to be considerably less than that.

This year I decided not to coach and went back to working part-time after school 2 days per week. My reward? MONEY (to attempt to open my own gym this summer).

The young teachers I have come across are some of the most ambitious, talented, creative and caring individuals I have known. But who wouldn’t get bitter and jaded at seeing friends who work in other industries getting a 15,000 dollar x-mas bonus while they get a pen stuffed in their mailbox (with no card) as a bonus for all their hard work?

Sorry for the rant, It’s not like I hate my job, but I get very sick of listening to people chastise teachers for either not doing enough, or wanting more money. As with everything, you can’t have it both ways!!!

AJ