- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
2
Posted on 10/28/19 at 3:45 pm to BamaGradinTn
quote:
Here's a thought: instead of art teachers, let's use PE teachers. In other words...football, baseball, and basketball coaches.
Good luck getting communities in Louisiana, MIssissippi, Georgia, Alabama, and Florida to go along with paying their coaches less than what the rest of the faculty makes
You're making my point. Getting good football coaches is harder than getting good art teachers or for that matter it's probably harder than getting good physics teachers
you're way too emotional about it because you are worried about what you think seems important rather than realizing that pay is related to how hard it is to get somebody to do the job at the quality you need them to do it. Nothing more
This really is a fundamental problem that the educational system has along with our society in general.
People need to just come to terms with the reality that salary is simply related to how much I have to pay to get the quality I need.
It doesn't matter if you do the hardest job on the planet if for some reason everytime I advertise for the position I have three hundred applicants. You ain't going to get paid s***
Posted on 10/28/19 at 3:46 pm to cahoots
Merit pay in public education simply does not work. Different forms of it have been tried down through the years and ALL have eventually been abandoned. There is plenty of data on this and I have read much of it. I was on two committees (one local, one state) to structure merit pay while I was teaching as merit pay was always something I favored in my career.
You want kids to learn more? Pay teachers a lot more than you are now, better teaching candidates will emerge over time, and learning will increase slowly. Gotta do many other things as well.
You want kids to learn more? Pay teachers a lot more than you are now, better teaching candidates will emerge over time, and learning will increase slowly. Gotta do many other things as well.
Posted on 10/28/19 at 3:51 pm to GeorgeWest
(no message)
This post was edited on 1/20/20 at 1:21 pm
Posted on 10/28/19 at 3:52 pm to cahoots
quote:
I don't doubt it. It's tough to recruit at the bad schools. I just fail to see how salaries even lower than average are going to cut it. Louisiana has shite districts that pay less than good districts. That is untenable.
I honestly can't speak specifically to the various school districts in Louisiana in terms of teacher pay scales.
I can tell you that what you describe isn't the norm nationally. Nationally bad school districts tend to have higher pay teachers and it doesn't help one f****** bit.
Now let me be clear here. I used to spend a lot of time traveling to recruit in many different schools in multiple States. And there is absolutely no doubt that the quality of teacher in the crappy school is worse. It was really obvious to me that crappy schools basically had three categories of teacher. Fresh out of college and took the job because it was all that was available. Long-term teachers who why wouldn't let teach my dog and were they are because they couldn't get a job anywhere else. And a small subset of true believers. Good teachers who are sticking it out.
Unfortunately you can't populate a school with that.
so I've spent a lot of time telling you why your idea won't work and frankly why even my idea won't really make the bad schools better. It will just make the good schools better because it will be easier to get physics teachers.
For the bad schools I'm going to be a heretic here. We need lower graduation rates. Far lower graduation rates. The primary impediment to everything good in a school is too many students who are wasting everybody's time.
We are way too wrapped up around trying to get these kids through so they can hold a piece of meaningless paper in their hands while they can still barely read
Kick these losers the hell out of school and then see what you can do with the rest. I don't mourn the fact that we can't teach the crappy kids in those schools. I mourn the fact that the decent kids are often forced to give up
This post was edited on 10/28/19 at 3:55 pm
Posted on 10/28/19 at 3:54 pm to ShortyRob
(no message)
This post was edited on 1/20/20 at 1:21 pm
Posted on 10/28/19 at 3:57 pm to ShortyRob
Am I wrong that there is nothing that can be done because of the lack of parental involvement.
A school didn't teach me to read. My mom did.
A school didn't teach me to read. My mom did.
Posted on 10/28/19 at 4:05 pm to ShortyRob
quote:We dont get much of that...we do get a "the teacher was out for a family illness...we had a sub for 6 days, but the curriculum says we MUST have a unit test on blah blah blah THIS day or we will be out of compliance with the curriculum..........yes, we understand the kids have never been taught, received any info but we are having a test no matter what.....we google the shite out of it, study for hours then make a 50 because we didn't write our answers in a mandated SER method. HOW you write is much more important than WHAT you write.
I mean, ya know. Johnny can't read, but we're gonna make sure he gets his block of anti-bullying training.
Janie can't read, but, she can put a fricking condom on a dick!
Neither of them can read, but, we do need to make sure they know what they are officially supposed to think about Transgenders.....
I could go on
Posted on 10/28/19 at 4:07 pm to roadGator
quote:This is part of it, but even schools with amazing parental involvement the kids are getting pushed thru State mandated curriculum no matter what is happening at the local school.
Am I wrong that there is nothing that can be done because of the lack of parental involvement.
We need less of this, and if we have merit based raises we will see more and more of a nanny state.
Posted on 10/28/19 at 4:18 pm to cahoots
quote:
Well, I will meet you in the middle here. I don't think it makes sense to try to get every kid into college or anything. But I think a HS diploma is doable and necessary to live in today's world. Having a bunch of illterate folks in society is not good
My point is, the diploma should mean something and frankly, right now, it doesn't. I see no benefit in handing someone a diploma when they can barely function. I would rather have fewer people with diplomas who actually learned something. The two are frankly incompatible. You can't have both.
Posted on 10/28/19 at 4:20 pm to memphis tiger
quote:
But what about those schools with bad principals who would just give raises to everyone or worse just hook up their friends regardless of weather they have earned it or not.
If a high quality teacher wasn't getting raises because the principal was playing favorites, that teacher would be free to leave and find a better situation.
That happens enough times, the school will be full of crappy teachers.
There would have to be principal accountability, superintendent accountability, etc.
Kinda like college football. Football team sucks, fire the head coach. New coach comes in. If the football team still sucks, fire the head coach AND the athletic director.
Posted on 10/28/19 at 4:23 pm to cahoots
quote:
My buddy's school has ONE counselor for 1,000 students
And yet, some people would tell you that having counselors at all is stupid, and that's not the job of the school to provide those services.
Posted on 10/28/19 at 4:29 pm to ShortyRob
quote:
I guarantee you that if you came to where I live right now and we placed two ads for 10 teachers out there.
1. In Madison City Schools teaching high school
2. Teaching at Lee High School, Huntsville, same salary as #1 plus 15%
We're gonna have people beating the door down for #1, and, you probably aren't going to have enough applicants for #2.
Fair enough.
But for #2? What if we make it 25%? 50%? 75%? 25% plus state income tax free earnings? 30% but completely free benefits?
My point is, 15% isn't enough money to put up with all the problems at a bad school, so a bad school will only attract bad teachers. But... everyone has a price, and significantly more money would probably cause more teachers to be willing to take a chance for a year or two and see what happens.
Look at an engineer. Presumably, they are good at math. After 20 years as a professional engineer, they might make 150K a year. After 20 years as a kickass high school math teacher, they might make 60K a year.
Does the school need to pay 150K a year to get him to teach math? No... because maybe the benefits are better, he gets more time off, better hours, etc. But you probably have to pay him 100K.
Posted on 10/28/19 at 4:31 pm to roadGator
quote:
Am I wrong that there is nothing that can be done because of the lack of parental involvement.
I wouldn't go that far... some things can be done.
But if you have two average kids, one with parental involvement and one without, the one with it will go further and be more successful in school.
Posted on 10/28/19 at 4:33 pm to LSUFanHouston
quote:
But for #2? What if we make it 25%? 50%? 75%? 25% plus state income tax free earnings? 30% but completely free benefits?
My point is, 15% isn't enough money to put up with all the problems at a bad school, so a bad school will only attract bad teachers. But... everyone has a price, and significantly more money would probably cause more teachers to be willing to take a chance for a year or two and see what happens
If you think you're going to tax the frick out of the people who are the REASON good school districts are good so that you can poach their teachers out of their districts and send them to places that ain't funding shite, and you will succeed with that politically, good friggin luck.
Yeah. Everyone has a price but you need to remember HOW you are paying it
Posted on 10/28/19 at 4:40 pm to ShortyRob
quote:
and you will succeed with that politically,
And there it is.
We can talk about all the things that COULD happen to improve schools... but all of them are subject to political realities.
Those political realities are what screwed the pooch in the first place.
If we knocked the politics out, we could:
1) Cut a whole lot of BS spending / BS positions, which would free up money for higher teacher pay
2) Pay the crappy teachers less, freeing up more money for the better teachers.
If we still lived in Katy, TX, my wife would be making 12K more year teaching, than she is making in LA. And... Katy ISD spends LESS per student than her current school district does. And their school facilities are amazing, so they aren't skimping there, either.
Major, dramatic increases in teacher pay will take investment from the community (i.e. taxes) but would you be willing to pay $1,000 more per year in property taxes to be able to utilize the public schools and save $6,000 per year (per student) in school tuition?
But you can do a lot without raising taxes.
This post was edited on 10/28/19 at 4:41 pm
Posted on 10/28/19 at 5:09 pm to LSUFanHouston
quote:
would you be willing to pay $1,000 more per year in property taxes to be able to utilize the public schools and save $6,000 per year (per student) in school tuition?
Personally, no. Not without gutting the system as it is today and starting fresh. And abolishing teacher (or any public sector) unions. If so, yes I would pay more in taxes and be all about higher salaries but we both know that's not happening. So the heck with higher taxes. The good parents will be invested in their children's education and they will flourish regardless of the school, quality of teacher or that teacher's salary.
This post was edited on 10/28/19 at 5:17 pm
Posted on 10/28/19 at 5:17 pm to El Segundo Guy
quote:
Personally, no. Not without gutting the system as it is today and starting fresh. And abolishing teacher (or any public sector) unions. If so, yes I would pay more in taxes and be all about higher salaries but we both know that's not happening. So the heck with higher taxes. The good parents will be invested in their children's education and they will flourish regardless of the school, quality of teacher or that teacher's salary.
I think in order to move to a system where you have much higher salaries for good teachers, you would have to blow up the system and start over, and that includes getting rid of collective bargaining. Any environment in which teachers are paid based on merit, eliminates unions.
Posted on 10/28/19 at 5:21 pm to Eurocat
quote:
It will punish the teachers in the worst/poorest areas, not the worst teachers
Hammer meets nail.
If you live in a good school district, this won't really effect you. And their are lazy teachers in decent areas.
The rule would just hurt the poor areas that already can't afford decent staff.
Posted on 10/28/19 at 5:37 pm to volod
quote:
The rule would just hurt the poor areas that already can't afford decent staff.
Not if you use a value-added model. You may need to add some "hazard pay" for the really bad schools.
Add a multiplier to the performance metrics for low-performing schools.
Plenty of ways to deal with this.
Page 10 of 11
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News