What's the deal with shcool teachers?

[hobart]

Originally Posted by tsuchang [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

My point is, it is a low paying job, they know it is a low paying job, they go to college to get a low paying job. Then they complain that it is a low paying job. That isn't very bright.

If only teachers fit this description you might have a point.

I don't think starting teachers complain that much. I think it's that their wages don't increase by the same factor that their job gets shittier year after year thanks to budget cuts, larger class sizes, more bureaucracy,etc.

[Tethler]

Originally Posted by hobart [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

If only teachers fit this description you might have a point.

I don't think starting teachers complain that much. I think it's that their wages don't increase by the same factor that their job gets shittier year after year thanks to budget cuts, larger class sizes, more bureaucracy,etc.

In many places, teachers have taken pay cuts as well. Like, 2020 take-home salary is 5% smaller than it was in 2000. I mean, if they pull in 60k they aren't starving, unless they live in San Francisco or something, but I can understand why they'd be unhappy that their job is getting harder while simultaneously making the same or less money.

[reznor_]

OP is one of the reasons Americans are dumber than the rest of the world.

[reznor_]

And so is anyone else who thinks not having a good education system which rewards the best isn't a good thing. You want dominance to stay in America? Get good teachers.

[Blingy]

Originally Posted by reznor_ [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

And so is anyone else who thinks not having a good education system which rewards the best isn't a good thing. You want dominance to stay in America? Get good teachers.

If the teachers didn't have a singular/linear thought process about how the world should be I'd put more faith in them. A good education system would be awesome but how each of us defines what is good varies so wildly it's going to take a cultural change to agree on what good means.

My neck of the woods definition of good: STEM focused diploma with 1,000+ hours of STEM extra-circulars over 4 years followed by a STEM degree and a path to work at one of the STEM companies starting at $100k+/year. Everything else and your kid and the parent by extension are failures at life.

[reznor_]

Originally Posted by Blingy [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

If the teachers didn't have a singular/linear thought process about how the world should be I'd put more faith in them. A good education system would be awesome but how each of us defines what is good varies so wildly it's going to take a cultural change to agree on what good means.

My neck of the woods definition of good: STEM focused diploma with 1,000+ hours of STEM extra-circulars over 4 years followed by a STEM degree and a path to work at one of the STEM companies starting at $100k+/year. Everything else and your kid and the parent by extension are failures at life.

I don't think teachers (as a collection) do...thats why there are such an array of teachers, and it's why liberals/conservative parents complain that their children are being "indoctrinated" at schools. Parents fucking suck if they can't teach their kids to think critically -- these are people who should never have been allowed to have kids in the first place.

So, I disagree that it should be purely STEM focused. I have a PhD in nuclear engineering. I'm published in a number of peer-reviewed journals. I think liberal arts, social studies, humanities, art, music etc are a critical part of school curriculum, because if the world was entirely STEM focused it would be one of the most boring existences out there. I'm very thankful for my colleagues who aren't scientists and engineers. They help make the world a more interesting place. If our existence was purely left or right brain, how awful a world this would be.

That being said, I completely agree that the definition of "good" is such a tough one to get right. I think it's important to have well rounded curriculum through K-12 and then give someone a few years to figure out what they want to do. I disagree with the "graduate high school and jump right into college" tradition because I think most people don't know what they want to do when they're 18. I certainly didn't.

I think teaching is a hard job. Often thankless. I'm referring to the K-12 path here -- I have friends who love their jobs as professors and make a lot of money doing it, but they also work at very prestigious universities and write a lot of grants and are rewarded for it. I have friends who teach middle and high school, and that job is one that is thankless and fraught with meddling parents who don't know their ass from a hole in the ground.

[Blingy]

Originally Posted by reznor_ [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I don't think teachers (as a collection) do...thats why there are such an array of teachers, and it's why liberals/conservative parents complain that their children are being "indoctrinated" at schools. Parents fucking suck if they can't teach their kids to think critically -- these are people who should never have been allowed to have kids in the first place.

So, I disagree that it should be purely STEM focused. I have a PhD in nuclear engineering. I'm published in a number of peer-reviewed journals. I think liberal arts, social studies, humanities, art, music etc are a critical part of school curriculum, because if the world was entirely STEM focused it would be one of the most boring existences out there. I'm very thankful for my colleagues who aren't scientists and engineers. They help make the world a more interesting place. If our existence was purely left or right brain, how awful a world this would be.

That being said, I completely agree that the definition of "good" is such a tough one to get right. I think it's important to have well rounded curriculum through K-12 and then give someone a few years to figure out what they want to do. I disagree with the "graduate high school and jump right into college" tradition because I think most people don't know what they want to do when they're 18. I certainly didn't.

I think teaching is a hard job. Often thankless. I'm referring to the K-12 path here -- I have friends who love their jobs as professors and make a lot of money doing it, but they also work at very prestigious universities and write a lot of grants and are rewarded for it. I have friends who teach middle and high school, and that job is one that is thankless and fraught with meddling parents who don't know their ass from a hole in the ground.

I have a habit of writing novels where a short story would work fine. I left a bunch of qualifiers out for the sake of brevity. Anyway, qualifiers to my post. The east side of King county (few miles east of Seattle) focuses very heavily on STEM. This region exists because of it. Before Microsoft set up shop we were a little bit of farm land, mining, minor commercial/retail businesses. Since the mid 1980's though when MS started gaining traction this area has boomed. We're now a major tech hub all built on STEM. Most families around here are supported by STEM. Even the non-stem people recognize the value of STEM around here. Because of this STEM is pushed by the entire local society; including the school system. It's easy to understand why it's pushed so hard around here. I've seen the same mindset in other places I've lived but with the focus in other areas. North Idaho pushed getting into the lumber or mining industry when I was in Highschool. Walla Walla had the idea that you either become a professional doctor, lawyer or take over the family farm. My elementary school years in Utah all I remember hearing about was start your own small business and grow it into a major enterprise.

If you get outside the Seattle-east King County area this mindset goes away. Although people in say Tacoma or Everett recognize STEM as a viable path those areas are also way more open minded to other ways of "winning" at life.

[Jibartik]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdnDnc5rOm4

[fastboy21]

I'd hardly call teaching a "low paying job" --- most public teachers in my district make over 100k / year, get excellent benefits, a property right to their job (tenure) and a pension guarentee which typically includes health insurance for life...

I agree that you have virtually 0% chance of striking it rich, but it isn't by a stretch a bad profession to go into...especially if you are a good at it and enjoy doing it.

The real resentment in faculty rooms is usually towards mooching co-worker teachers who earn the same salary/benefits and overpaid administrators that justify by their position by interfering with teachers trying to teach.

[reznor_]

Originally Posted by fastboy21 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I'd hardly call teaching a "low paying job" --- most public teachers in my district make over 100k / year, get excellent benefits, a property right to their job (tenure) and a pension guarentee which typically includes health insurance for life...

I agree that you have virtually 0% chance of striking it rich, but it isn't by a stretch a bad profession to go into...especially if you are a good at it and enjoy doing it.

The real resentment in faculty rooms is usually towards mooching co-worker teachers who earn the same salary/benefits and overpaid administrators that justify by their position by interfering with teachers trying to teach.

Sounds like a very white, white-collar, wealthy family school district in the suburbs. Am I wrong?

Most public school teachers I know make far less than 100k/year. They work in cities. They buy school supplies for the kids using their own money, because the district doesn't have enough money for them. Underprivileged kids need devoted, well paid teachers too. These people teach for the love of it, and they should be compensated because it's a very hard job.