Stephen Jobs Blasts Teacher Unions

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
101

[quote]ron33 wrote:
kroc30 wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
doogie wrote:
The best teachers are Teach For America graduates who only teach for two or three years.

Passionate, well trained, and in and out before they burn out.

I read about a dude who did just that, in Washington DC. He was idealistic, had just worked on the Kerry campaign. He got sued for touching a kid on the shoulder. The kid told his mom that the guy punched him in the chest.

Going into the inner city…big mistake. Teach in rich suburbs, where the students will be real ‘players’ in the future. I’ve had West Point grads, Harvard, Brown, Wharton,…you name it. Sure beats teaching Trigonometry For Terrorists.

Absolutely true, but in the rich suburbs, you also have to deal alot more with the parents who swear their kids can do no wrong, or give you reasons why they need to pass even though they cut you 30 out of 40 class sessions for the marking period or they’ll sue. False accusations are the reasons you leave your door open if you’re ever close to being alone with a student. I personally will bring someone to another room or make sure someone is close by to prevent just such an incident.

Wanted to get your take on this.During the yrs. that Billy Boy was potus,my kids schools were getting new computers,books playground equip. etc.Since W and his bunch have been in control the schools have’nt recieved anything new,in fact the teachers have had to buy paper, supplies etc. with their own money,which i dont think they should have to do.

Also some of the parents do fund raisors to buy needed school supps.In the last few yrs. they built a new indoor sports complex which im sure there were plenty of kick backs to school board mems. admin. etc.But then they dont have money for everyday supplies.

I think if the kids want to play sports they should have to buy their own equipment ,in the area i’m in the kids that are good atheletes dont make the team unless grandma -pa or mom and dad have money and connections,small community school system.

There have been several kids that were great at sports then when they came to jr. high didnt make the team and several it affected and they eventually became frustrated and dropped out of school,these were kids that did’nt have great homelife’s and their sports made things bareable,but when they werent selected because of politics they eventually gave up.
[/quote]

Bush never vetoes anything. I remember him approving something like an 11% increase in the budget for the dept of Education. I suspect all the money goes to bureaucrats and other such scum, and not for the kids. Why this happened under Bush and not under Clinton is a mystery to me.

Doogie?

102

Ron, I don’t see the sports stuff too much where I am, but you definitely see the funding and money get abused. New wings get built, entire schools get redone, there are probably kickbacks up the wazoo that no one can prove, then the Board and the administrators cry poverty to the residents of the district, causing us to have to pay for our supplies out of pocket, layoffs, cancellation of sports unless the parents raise the money, etc.

One of the other problems is that some of the grants given by the fed or state will specify exactly what the money is to be spent on, so if a school gets a grant for construction, adding a wing, etc. that is exactly what it has to go to. There is no incentive to save money or cost cut in order to use the money elsewhere.

One of the last problems lies directly within the teachers, administrators and the boards. Those who haven’t spent a portion of their adult working life out of the classroom, house, etc. have no clue how real world construction, costs, etc. operate. It’s like the professor in Back to School with Rodney Dangerfield. Plenty of theory, but no practice.

It’s ridicuosly easy for someone on the outside to take advantage, jack up costs, and get one over on the administrators and the board. Most school boards are also voluntary, so a little kickback goes a long way at times.

The best example of this I can think of is the Easport South Manor School District out on Long Island. About 10 years ago, the two districts decided to merge and create one large district. Perfectly reasonable, cost efficient, etc. in theory. Then it was decided that they needed a completely new high school, from the ground up. From a teacher’s perspective, the new building is supposedly a paradise.

Plenty of accessible technology, brand new everything, from the ground up, all that crap that I don’t get in the City. Unfortunately, costs of the building wound up being “grossly underestimated” by the end of the construction (I think we can all surmise why) and within a year the board asked the district for somewhere around a 25% tax increase to cover the costs.

Why? Because no one in the district had the foresight to understand what they were getting into.

103

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
ron33 wrote:
kroc30 wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
doogie wrote:
The best teachers are Teach For America graduates who only teach for two or three years.

Passionate, well trained, and in and out before they burn out.

I read about a dude who did just that, in Washington DC. He was idealistic, had just worked on the Kerry campaign. He got sued for touching a kid on the shoulder. The kid told his mom that the guy punched him in the chest.

Going into the inner city…big mistake. Teach in rich suburbs, where the students will be real ‘players’ in the future. I’ve had West Point grads, Harvard, Brown, Wharton,…you name it. Sure beats teaching Trigonometry For Terrorists.

Absolutely true, but in the rich suburbs, you also have to deal alot more with the parents who swear their kids can do no wrong, or give you reasons why they need to pass even though they cut you 30 out of 40 class sessions for the marking period or they’ll sue. False accusations are the reasons you leave your door open if you’re ever close to being alone with a student. I personally will bring someone to another room or make sure someone is close by to prevent just such an incident.

Wanted to get your take on this.During the yrs. that Billy Boy was potus,my kids schools were getting new computers,books playground equip. etc.Since W and his bunch have been in control the schools have’nt recieved anything new,in fact the teachers have had to buy paper, supplies etc. with their own money,which i dont think they should have to do.

Also some of the parents do fund raisors to buy needed school supps.In the last few yrs. they built a new indoor sports complex which im sure there were plenty of kick backs to school board mems. admin. etc.But then they dont have money for everyday supplies.

I think if the kids want to play sports they should have to buy their own equipment ,in the area i’m in the kids that are good atheletes dont make the team unless grandma -pa or mom and dad have money and connections,small community school system.

There have been several kids that were great at sports then when they came to jr. high didnt make the team and several it affected and they eventually became frustrated and dropped out of school,these were kids that did’nt have great homelife’s and their sports made things bareable,but when they werent selected because of politics they eventually gave up.

Bush never vetoes anything. I remember him approving something like an 11% increase in the budget for the dept of Education. I suspect all the money goes to bureaucrats and other such scum, and not for the kids. Why this happened under Bush and not under Clinton is a mystery to me.

Doogie?

[/quote]

I can’t think of a single federal education program that would fund playground equipment and such. Under Bush, teachers do get a $500 tax credit for buying supplies. That’s $500 more than under Clinton.

104

[quote]doogie wrote:
…I can’t think of a single federal education program that would fund playground equipment and such. Under Bush, teachers do get a $500 tax credit for buying supplies. That’s $500 more than under Clinton.[/quote]

I find it is hard to believe anyone can blame Bush for not spending enough money.

105

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
doogie wrote:
…I can’t think of a single federal education program that would fund playground equipment and such. Under Bush, teachers do get a $500 tax credit for buying supplies. That’s $500 more than under Clinton.

I find it is hard to believe anyone can blame Bush for not spending enough money.[/quote]

The playgrounds would more than likely be covered under improvements to buildings and grounds. I don’t think anyone is saying that Bush didn’t spend enough, it just wound up not going to the right places. I’m personally far from being a Bush supporter, but he’s tried to do more for education than Clinton, his father, or Reagan for that matter, and for that I have to give him full credit.

106

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
doogie wrote:
…I can’t think of a single federal education program that would fund playground equipment and such. Under Bush, teachers do get a $500 tax credit for buying supplies. That’s $500 more than under Clinton.

I find it is hard to believe anyone can blame Bush for not spending enough money.[/quote]

That’s just it. There would never be enough. How much would make teachers happy? How much would make admin happy?

Once a higher level is agreed upon and reached to fund education, how long would it be until it still just wasn’t enough?

I’d be all for sending more tax dollars into the public school system if we were able to measure the return on the investment.

If we raise X, our expectations from the students is X. Don’t like that? If we give X, we expect teachers to be tested every year in their chosen field. The test to be given by a private third party, if not passed by the teacher, would mean termination.
Add to this a % of failure allowed by the students per teacher. Too many students fail in a given period ? Fire the teacher.

Give the system what it says it needs to meet the goals. If the goals are not met, fire the teachers.

107

[quote]Go-Rilla wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
doogie wrote:
…I can’t think of a single federal education program that would fund playground equipment and such. Under Bush, teachers do get a $500 tax credit for buying supplies. That’s $500 more than under Clinton.

I find it is hard to believe anyone can blame Bush for not spending enough money.

That’s just it. There would never be enough. How much would make teachers happy? How much would make admin happy?

Once a higher level is agreed upon and reached to fund education, how long would it be until it still just wasn’t enough?

I’d be all for sending more tax dollars into the public school system if we were able to measure the return on the investment.

If we raise X, our expectations from the students is X. Don’t like that? If we give X, we expect teachers to be tested every year in their chosen field. The test to be given by a private third party, if not passed by the teacher, would mean termination.
Add to this a % of failure allowed by the students per teacher. Too many students fail in a given period ? Fire the teacher.

Give the system what it says it needs to meet the goals. If the goals are not met, fire the teachers.

[/quote]

Interesting points, but just to clarify one or two things from teacher to non-teacher (not cutting on you, just speaking about what I know from experience).
Any agency, whether it’s teaching or otherwise will always start looking for more money once they get more. You run a business yourself, and, quite frankly, it’s the same principle. The more money in your pocket, the better off you are, so once you get more, you will eventually ask for an increase or try to create one. As for the accountability, check NCLB. Schools that don’t perform to expectations have their funding cut off. And it could be one little tiny area out of many. In other words, if a school has great test scores in every single area except 9th grade algebra, then they are accountable overall and are in danger of losing all the funding for the entire school if the scores don’t come up in 9th grade algebra. So one piece of what you’d like is in place already. As for teacher accountability, NYS and several other states have subject exams every 1-2 years to ensure teachers are doing the right thing. NYS has 3rd, 4th, 5th, and 8th grade assessments on the elementary, and all high schoolers are required to pass exams in the following:
Math on at least 2 levels (I believe changing to 3 this year)
Science exams for every level taken (2 minimum)
Social Studies exams in World and US History (this covers the first 3 years of HS)
A cumulative English exam in 11th grade.
I’m pretty sure I’m missing at least 1-2 more exams on each level, this is just off the top of my head.
Teacher accountability is partially based on the passing rates of the students, besides being observed in class by administration from 4-10 times a year, depending on the district. While there is no definite percentage to hold someone accountable, I can tell you that (not from personal experience)if your passing rates are on the low end in your building, then you are going to have to answer for what you did with the students all year.
The only problem I see is firing a teacher for failing students. It’s placing the blame on the wrong person, at times and would create the idea of teachers just passing kids to keep their jobs, which in turn would also screw up the system even more because then an unprepared child is moving on. If a child is not doing their work , going to class, or performing up to the expectations of a teacher, and that teacher has made all outreaches possible (parents, administration, counselors, probation officers, etc.), then that child needs to fail and not move on. Speaking from my own experiences, I keep a phone and letter log of all phone calls and contacts of every student I have, so if I have to fail them, everything is on paper and all people involved are aware of the situation. In addition, any time a student fails an exam in my class, misbehaves, or gets out of line, there is a letter or a phone call home. Essentially, anyone who fails me earned that grade. If it happens to be a large #, then so be it. Every class and year has a different tone and personality, so a teacher will always have varying passing rates for their class. As for the state exams, any good teacher can easily reach a 75-80% passing rate, including in inner city schools such as the one I work at.

108

I can tell you that standards differ a lot more from state to state than I thought, and more than they should.

If we based teacher pay on local median
income levels, I’m sure there is a better standard to use but anyway, how much above or below the median would you suggest a starting teacher’s pay be?

Forget advanced degree increases for the sake of this discussion. Just out of school, want to be a teacher, median income level in my county is 45K.

What should I expect and for how long?
Would more money be a replacement for tenure? What is tenure worth in dollars? Many would probably choose tenure over more money. Why do you think that would be?

109

[quote]Go-Rilla wrote:
I can tell you that standards differ a lot more from state to state than I thought, and more than they should.

If we based teacher pay on local median
income levels, I’m sure there is a better standard to use but anyway, how much above or below the median would you suggest a starting teacher’s pay be?

Forget advanced degree increases for the sake of this discussion. Just out of school, want to be a teacher, median income leve in my county is 45K.

What should I expect and for how long?
Would more money be a replacement for tenure? What is tenure worth in dollars? Many would probably choose tenure over more money. Why do you think that would be?[/quote]

The differences from state to state are insane. I’m lucky enough to be in NY, so if I do move out of state, my license automatically crosses over in something like 25-30 other states because our standards are that much higher, and some of what we see and deal with on a daily basis is that much harder than some other areas.

As for the money, here is what I can tell you. 45k median income is somewhat lower than LI and NYC, but your cost of living is probably significantly lower also. A first year teacher in NYC with just a regular Bachelor’s and nothing else starts at $43,436 (just checked my salary scale). The Long Island and other suburban districts around the city (well over 100) usually start somewhere between 35 and 50k.
NYC used to be on the lower end, but they had such a shortage of teachers and still have such a problem holding on to teachers that they have had to increase the pay significantly in the last 10 years.
Other areas outside of here are usually at least 10-20% less as far as starting salary goes, but once again, the cost of living up here is easily that much higher also, so a 30k or so starting salary in say North Carolina will go farther than the 43k up here.

110

[quote]Go-Rilla wrote:
I can tell you that standards differ a lot more from state to state than I thought, and more than they should.

If we based teacher pay on local median
income levels, I’m sure there is a better standard to use but anyway, how much above or below the median would you suggest a starting teacher’s pay be?

Forget advanced degree increases for the sake of this discussion. Just out of school, want to be a teacher, median income level in my county is 45K.

What should I expect and for how long?
Would more money be a replacement for tenure? What is tenure worth in dollars? Many would probably choose tenure over more money. Why do you think that would be?[/quote]

Forgot the second part. Most teachers wouldn’t trade more pay for replacing tenure. It’s been tried a couple of times already. While the system is not perfect and I will fully concede that there are people who abuse it, it does provide a level of job security that prevents administrators from canning people for money and bullshit reasons only. Tenure is also not necessarily the bulletproof, can work and fuck up for the next 30 years, and there’s nothing you can do about it protection that people make it out to be. If you are a screw up, then administration can get you out. There are extra procedures, hearings, etc that are required, but a job is definitely not 110% secure after receiving tenure.

Also - the median income around where I am is somewhere in the area of 55-70k, depending on where you live, to add to that comparison of teacher salaries.

111

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Marmadogg wrote:
Marmadogg wrote:
Where will the money come from?

Tax and spend?

BUMP!

Do any of the teachers out there that cry about their income want to tell me who is suppose to pay for their salary increases?

Crickets…

You bumped yourself? What a fucking moron…

I already told you…fire 90% of the administrators. Also, quit spending money on everything but the teachers. The public system in the next town built a brand-new admin center, then laid off a bunch of teachers. More fucking morons…

[/quote]

Here is an idea…get a job that holds you accountable.

Your pay is commensurate with your risk.

112

[quote]kroc30 wrote:
Go-Rilla wrote:
I can tell you that standards differ a lot more from state to state than I thought, and more than they should.

If we based teacher pay on local median
income levels, I’m sure there is a better standard to use but anyway, how much above or below the median would you suggest a starting teacher’s pay be?

Forget advanced degree increases for the sake of this discussion. Just out of school, want to be a teacher, median income level in my county is 45K.

What should I expect and for how long?
Would more money be a replacement for tenure? What is tenure worth in dollars? Many would probably choose tenure over more money. Why do you think that would be?

Forgot the second part. Most teachers wouldn’t trade more pay for replacing tenure. It’s been tried a couple of times already. While the system is not perfect and I will fully concede that there are people who abuse it, it does provide a level of job security that prevents administrators from canning people for money and bullshit reasons only. Tenure is also not necessarily the bulletproof, can work and fuck up for the next 30 years, and there’s nothing you can do about it protection that people make it out to be. If you are a screw up, then administration can get you out. There are extra procedures, hearings, etc that are required, but a job is definitely not 110% secure after receiving tenure.

Also - the median income around where I am is somewhere in the area of 55-70k, depending on where you live, to add to that comparison of teacher salaries.[/quote]

NJ is worse than LI from what I have been told.

I can not understand why someone would want to be a teacher unless they were already independently wealthy or your spouse rakes in the big bucks because you are definitely not going to live a ‘good life’ as a teacher.

113

[quote]kroc30 wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
doogie wrote:
…I can’t think of a single federal education program that would fund playground equipment and such. Under Bush, teachers do get a $500 tax credit for buying supplies. That’s $500 more than under Clinton.

I find it is hard to believe anyone can blame Bush for not spending enough money.

The playgrounds would more than likely be covered under improvements to buildings and grounds. I don’t think anyone is saying that Bush didn’t spend enough, it just wound up not going to the right places. I’m personally far from being a Bush supporter, but he’s tried to do more for education than Clinton, his father, or Reagan for that matter, and for that I have to give him full credit.[/quote]

Kroc have enjoyed reading your comments,and from what i’ve read ,it sounds like your students are lucky to have a teacher like you.You seem to look at subjects with an open mind not just a tunnel vision veiw point like alot of people,I also like how you protect yourself with paperwork so they cant give you the shaft.There was a first year male teacher at my sons grade school that had his career ruined by two little trouble making girls who later admitted the accusations they made were lies because they didnt like the teacher.

There is a 10 yr. difference between my oldest and youngest child.It seemed when my oldest was in grade school the teachers had more time to spend on a subject to make sure the students understood the material and also had more subject matter.Now it seems they skip alot of material and cant spend as much time just to take these tests they have come up with in the last few yrs.Since my young one has moved up to jr. high it seems they are a little more layed back and learning again.We are in public schools or is that Shules in southern O hi O .

114

[quote]Go-Rilla wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
doogie wrote:
…I can’t think of a single federal education program that would fund playground equipment and such. Under Bush, teachers do get a $500 tax credit for buying supplies. That’s $500 more than under Clinton.

I find it is hard to believe anyone can blame Bush for not spending enough money.

That’s just it. There would never be enough. How much would make teachers happy? How much would make admin happy?

Once a higher level is agreed upon and reached to fund education, how long would it be until it still just wasn’t enough?

I’d be all for sending more tax dollars into the public school system if we were able to measure the return on the investment.

If we raise X, our expectations from the students is X. Don’t like that? If we give X, we expect teachers to be tested every year in their chosen field. The test to be given by a private third party, if not passed by the teacher, would mean termination.
Add to this a % of failure allowed by the students per teacher. Too many students fail in a given period ? Fire the teacher.

Give the system what it says it needs to meet the goals. If the goals are not met, fire the teachers.
[/quote]

As long as they get a refund on the body armor some have to buy…

115

[quote]Marmadogg wrote:
kroc30 wrote:
Go-Rilla wrote:
I can tell you that standards differ a lot more from state to state than I thought, and more than they should.

If we based teacher pay on local median
income levels, I’m sure there is a better standard to use but anyway, how much above or below the median would you suggest a starting teacher’s pay be?

Forget advanced degree increases for the sake of this discussion. Just out of school, want to be a teacher, median income level in my county is 45K.

What should I expect and for how long?
Would more money be a replacement for tenure? What is tenure worth in dollars? Many would probably choose tenure over more money. Why do you think that would be?

Forgot the second part. Most teachers wouldn’t trade more pay for replacing tenure. It’s been tried a couple of times already. While the system is not perfect and I will fully concede that there are people who abuse it, it does provide a level of job security that prevents administrators from canning people for money and bullshit reasons only. Tenure is also not necessarily the bulletproof, can work and fuck up for the next 30 years, and there’s nothing you can do about it protection that people make it out to be. If you are a screw up, then administration can get you out. There are extra procedures, hearings, etc that are required, but a job is definitely not 110% secure after receiving tenure.

Also - the median income around where I am is somewhere in the area of 55-70k, depending on where you live, to add to that comparison of teacher salaries.

NJ is worse than LI from what I have been told.

I can not understand why someone would want to be a teacher unless they were already independently wealthy or your spouse rakes in the big bucks because you are definitely not going to live a ‘good life’ as a teacher.[/quote]

I’m not sure which is worse as far as cost of living goes, but I know that we’re pretty damn close in salaries, housing, and other basic expenses, except gas (your prices are 20-30 cents lower than us). I know for both states, the extra opportunities available evens out the salary a little.

It’s much easier to set up a side business, get a 2nd job, or take advantage of the extra opportunities most schools offer after school to boost the income. I’m technically off this week from school, but during the downtime, I’ll tutor 5 kids for a total of 10 hours, and get out all my ads and flyers out for the small landscaping business I also do on the side.

Most of the other teachers I know are pretty much the same in attitude. We all love what we do, which is what keeps us there, but we all have something set up on the side also to bring in more money.

116

[quote]ron33 wrote:
kroc30 wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
doogie wrote:
…I can’t think of a single federal education program that would fund playground equipment and such. Under Bush, teachers do get a $500 tax credit for buying supplies. That’s $500 more than under Clinton.

I find it is hard to believe anyone can blame Bush for not spending enough money.

The playgrounds would more than likely be covered under improvements to buildings and grounds. I don’t think anyone is saying that Bush didn’t spend enough, it just wound up not going to the right places. I’m personally far from being a Bush supporter, but he’s tried to do more for education than Clinton, his father, or Reagan for that matter, and for that I have to give him full credit.

Kroc have enjoyed reading your comments,and from what i’ve read ,it sounds like your students are lucky to have a teacher like you.You seem to look at subjects with an open mind not just a tunnel vision veiw point like alot of people,I also like how you protect yourself with paperwork so they cant give you the shaft.There was a first year male teacher at my sons grade school that had his career ruined by two little trouble making girls who later admitted the accusations they made were lies because they didnt like the teacher.

There is a 10 yr. difference between my oldest and youngest child.It seemed when my oldest was in grade school the teachers had more time to spend on a subject to make sure the students understood the material and also had more subject matter.Now it seems they skip alot of material and cant spend as much time just to take these tests they have come up with in the last few yrs.Since my young one has moved up to jr. high it seems they are a little more layed back and learning again.We are in public schools or is that Shules in southern O hi O .

[/quote]

Thanks, man. We have the same problem here. It’s kind of like the extra accountability killed some of the free thought because no matter what you do, you wind up teaching to the test. It’s definitely a tough balance. The other stuff is a matter of covering your ass. If you don’t, you will get burned in the end every time, and it doesn’t matter if it’s inner city or the richest town. Someone will take advantage.

117

Let’s use 50K as a benchmark.

In this exercise, the benchmark median applies to the entire country.

From a teacher’s standpoint, how much would be considered fair market starting salary, based on the median for the area.

Would 10% above the area median income level be considered a great starting place to get the best? would exact median be considered fair?

All I hear is that teacher pay is just “too low”. Can’t get and keep teachers.

I’d just like to know what is fair for a starting teacher. Before I became self employed I was either on commission, salary+ commission or salary + incentives based on net profit for a business unit etc…

I understand that teaching can’t be structured in that manner but I’d think that once a benchmark is decided fair by the teachers, considering all of the other perks teachers get, any increase in salary should be calculated based on performance only.

Tenure is just an incredible advantage that needs to be added to the mix.

118

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Go-Rilla wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
doogie wrote:

As long as they get a refund on the body armor some have to buy…

[/quote]

No refund. It’s already tax deductable due to being a business expense. Once we start down that road we’d have teachers taking the deduction from taxes, paid with tax dollars already, then getting a refund for a deductable item.

Then we’d have the guns and ammo showing up.

I’d agree with tax dollars buying the first pair of brass knuckles for 1st year teachers.

119

[quote]Go-Rilla wrote:
Let’s use 50K as a benchmark.

In this exercise, the benchmark median applies to the entire country.

From a teacher’s standpoint, how much would be considered fair market starting salary, based on the median for the area.

Would 10% above the area median income level be considered a great starting place to get the best? would exact median be considered fair?

All I hear is that teacher pay is just “too low”. Can’t get and keep teachers.

I’d just like to know what is fair for a starting teacher. Before I became self employed I was either on commission, salary+ commission or salary + incentives based on net profit for a business unit etc…

I understand that teaching can’t be structured in that manner but I’d think that once a benchmark is decided fair by the teachers, considering all of the other perks teachers get, any increase in salary should be calculated based on performance only.

Tenure is just an incredible advantage that needs to be added to the mix.

[/quote]

I don’t think I’ve ever heard of a starting salary above the median. If I’m calculating correctly, off the top of my head, it’s hitting about 2/3 of the median for most regions, at best. As for what would be reasonable, I’m gonna have to get back to you on that one. Since I started teaching, I’ve always worked under the assumption that I should have an extra income coming in beyond my salary to even things out. Teaching, for me wasn’t a money choice, it was more about doing something that made a difference. Cheesy yes, and I’ll throw on a dress for that statement, but I’ve always steered towards jobs that satisfy me personally, more than my wallet. The wallet part is easy enough to even out up here. In looking at your post again, 10% above median would be a phenomenal starting point up here. That would bring the starting range I mentioned to you before up to the 55-77k range. Very few kids make that as a base salary first year out of school in any profession.

120

I’ve never kept up with how teacher’s groups lobby. I don’t know if this approach has been considered.

Telling the public exactly what the fair market value of a teacher is, I think, would be the first place to start.

Maybe the school board needs to be told that exact median is the value. Considering the cost of education and the fact that most of the population has not paid for a college education, maybe this would be fair.

The exact deal makes no difference. The rambling point is that in every business, the market knows what fair is. That’s why you hear, “don’t like the pay, get another job” stuff.

Actually, moving toward the median sounds fair to me considering the amount of time taken off each year.

After that, you gotta prove yourself or hit the street.