Is teacher pay more important than the other variables for a good education?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by keepngoal

Why must you jump to conclusions from my posts? Are they not clear or do I mistype something? Teachers ARE needed, however they are NOT the sole nor the most important reason for a kid to succeed.

IMO the reason a kid succeeds should be in this order:

1. The student
2. The parents
3. The teacher
4. The administration

-keep

---

Quote:

---

And while it would matter the quality of the teacher, that variable, IMO, has the smallest effect on learning.

---

Maybe you just misread your own post. Or perhaps you should reorder your list?

Silly me, when someone says something has the smallest effect on something I jump to the conclusion that they feel it isn't necessary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cycloneworld

That article should end the discussion that teachers are underpaid. However, teachers work a lot more than just the time they are in the classroom but so does a lot of other professions.

---

Maybe, but it still depends on how important to society you feel this profession is. If you feel this is one of the most important professions, then you can still argue that they should get paid more.

Yes silly you.

Teachers should have the least amount of effect on a pupils learning.. but still substantial enough to make a difference.

You want my view painted in corner since you disagree with it, but I won't let you.

EDIT: Oh I get it... I added the administration at the last moment... so not to forget those behind the scenes...

either way you must agree with 1-3 then since you are arguing about #4.

-keep.

How about they have the least effect on those with daily, direct contact with the kid?

-keep.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by keepngoal

Yes silly you.

Teachers should have the least amount of effect on a pupils learning.. but still substantial enough to make a difference.

You want my view painted in corner since you disagree with it, but I won't let you.

EDIT: Oh I get it... I added the administration at the last moment... so not to forget those behind the scenes...

either way you must agree with 1-3 then since you are arguing about #4.

-keep.

---

You can't say that teachers have the least impact on learning and then say it's substantial in the same breath, it doesn't work like that.

I still don't agree with 1-3. To me it should be
1a. Student
1b. Parent
1c. Teacher.
One is not any more or less important than another, and to me, if everything is working as it should, you won't get the best results if you remove any one of them.

There is little doubt that students and their parents are the most important part of the equation. However, the original post and the cited article was talking about variables that could be controlled by the school district, such as "teacher quality[,] star principals, laptop computers or abundant electives." Among those controllable variables, there is also little doubt that teacher quality is the most important.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by keepngoal

oh sure there are kids that need that push... That is why I think parents are the next best thing to help a unmotivated or struggling kid who can't do it for themselves.

The teachers, should be the last step in an attempt to help, yes help, a kid succeed.

-keep.

---

I disagree with this thinking. Yes, the parents are very much responsible but they are not the ones teaching the kids the material in class which is where it all starts. If you think this then you should be home schooling your kids because then what is the point of having public schools teach our kids? You can help your kids succeed by keeping them motivated and on top of their schoolwork but if the teacher is not doing their job by teaching the material well all your efforts can only go so far. I don't know a lick about some subjects, the teacher is PAID to know it and teach it.

[quote=dosry5;412564]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by travman23

Interesting story. First off teachers are grossly underpaid for what they do.




I vehemently disagree. They are far from "grossly" underpaid.

A study done by the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research is widely accepted study that basically blows the "underpaid" theory out of the water. I think it's just become cliche to say that teachers are underpaid. Do they have an important job? Absolutely very important. But are they underpaid? The stats and the truth of the matter says no.

Article | The Teacher-Pay Myth

---

This could be one of the best articles ever. Teachers do not pay for their health insurance in many districts here in Iowa. Many of them also get a 2 for 1 match on their retirement accounts. Would you all like that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iceclone

There is little doubt that students and their parents are the most important part of the equation. However, the original post and the cited article was talking about variables that could be controlled by the school district, such as "teacher quality[,] star principals, laptop computers or abundant electives." Among those controllable variables, there is also little doubt that teacher quality is the most important.

---

The above quote captures the intent of what I had hoped the discussion would focus on....If you were the school superintentent realizing you had budget constraints, what actions would you take to improve the quality of the school system?

In the article I linked, the school system is reducing spending in a number of areas and applying the savings towards teacher compensation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by keepngoal

Yes silly you.

Teachers should have the least amount of effect on a pupils learning.. but still substantial enough to make a difference.

You want my view painted in corner since you disagree with it, but I won't let you.

EDIT: Oh I get it... I added the administration at the last moment... so not to forget those behind the scenes...

either way you must agree with 1-3 then since you are arguing about #4.

-keep.

---

As a teacher myself, I agree with your ordering of the first 3, but those 3 are much closer than you would believe from the way it sounds, and in a big part of the population those could be reversed. I know from experience that probably 5% of the students are motivated enough to succeed regardless of the teacher, while maybe 20-25% of them have enough support at home to succeed in spite of a poor teacher. To me, I would think the rest of the students (the unmotivated students without major support at home) are a big enough chunk of the population to warrant any method possible to improve teaching and give them a chance to succeed. If salaries are increased, more capable college students will decide to get into teaching and give us more quality teachers to choose from which will put the poor teachers in the position to either improve or find another occupation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by keepngoal

great concept and in theory.. but how do you MAKE the parents be the second step instead of the schools being the first?

It sounds great and has a great goal... but it will fail because it removed family responsibility.. like most gov't programs Dems dream up (even if it was W's this time).

-keep.

---

Glad you gave W the credit for NCLB. W also gets the credit for the Prescription Drug Benefit for Medicare. IMO those are two of the worst pieces of legislation we have ever had.

By the way, I don't think teachers are underpaid. They have all holidays off, including a couple weeks at Christmas, spring break, etc. and get sick days also. They work about 200 days per year. Pretty good benefits also. Not as bad as you might think. And most retire with a pretty good pension and benefits.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CloneAggie

And that teacher should get paid more than the teacher just going through the motions. Does that not make sense to people?

---

Oh I agree completely. How do employers differentiate though? Through student surveys? Who believes the kid?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iceclone

There is little doubt that students and their parents are the most important part of the equation. However, the original post and the cited article was talking about variables that could be controlled by the school district, such as "teacher quality[,] star principals, laptop computers or abundant electives." Among those controllable variables, there is also little doubt that teacher quality is the most important.

---

Teacher quality - The teaching profession is a unionized profession and as such the union does not seek more for excellence or quality...it seeks equality for all in the union no matter how poor their performance may be.

Star Principals - What is a "Star Principal"? I think if you look at most public school districts you will see that they are top heavy with administration that is paid too much for doing very little to actually impact the educational process.

Laptop Computers - How in the world did people learn before computers? I would submit that the education system pre-computer was better than the education post-computer. I pay about $10,000 per year to send my son to a private school and no laptop comes with the deal. His school spends more on Harkness Tables than laptops.

Abundant electives - Maybe we should concentrate on the basics before we worry about electives.