Teacher's Salary Increase Possible

[pseudoreality]

Just because no one went into teaching for the money means nothing. Few professionals are motivated primarily by money.

My mother is a retired teacher and her biggest complaint is curriculum development has taken away from the teacher's ability to creatively educate. She use to be able to spend a whole month on dinosaurs or two weeks on the Olympics and work it into every subject matter. Now teachers are over regulated and can't do stuff like that to get students interested. That's her opinion anyways.

[Daradon]

Originally Posted by Sliver

Literally every teacher I have known got into teaching for the full-time pay for 3/4 time work. Take away their three months off per year and teachers would fataing riot in the streets.

There are fair arguments, but this is the biggest bs argument out there. General public knowing nothing.

They are salary based. It's just the way their profession works. It's a perk if you want to see it that way, but in no way are they paid for doing nothing for time off.

An example I made in the past is firefighters. Do they only get paid when there is a fire?

It's a profession that has two months off in the summer. Yeah it's a reason people get on, but their not paid for those two months. It's salary based and paid out over twelve.

Dumbest argument out there. There are some good ones, and Cliff has me thinking, but this is easily the dumbest argument against teachers.(or any profession really)

[puffnstuff]

Originally Posted by bizaro86

Was that in Freakonomics by any chance?

Unless I'm remembering it wrong, they talked about finding the teachers that would cheat test results, giving students the answers to standardized tests, when their compensation was at stake as it was based on student achievement. American study though.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by Daradon

Woof. Pretty harsh.

I don't disagree that the infographic is one sided, I don't even like the quote myself. Unsolicited and heavy handed.

But it brings up points the public doesn't think about. Todays teachers have to be part psychologist, part doctor (have to know all about the meds their students are or are not on), part daycare/legal guardian, part volunteer athlete, part law student.

All the while educating and motivating.

There is a simple argument, idiom mostly. Yes, there are some bad teachers. Like any job. But more than most professions, teachers get involved cause they want to help. Make a difference.

The idiom is... no one ever went into teaching for the money.

Be honest, have you ever heard that?

Did you have a friend in university who was all 'I'm going into teaching for the free ride and the massive pay'?

What's harsh? Stating that social media causes those types of problems for kids? That has nothing to do with teachers so I'm not sure what's harsh about it. And I would agree with you that teacher's responsibilities have increased more than what they used to be. Also, it is definitely a shame that teachers can't be as creative with their curriculum.

Anyway, I will be honest. My best friend became a teacher, he was primarily motivated by the pension and the guaranteed job that doesn't suffer from a cyclical business environment like oil and gas and that you can't really get fired. He always wanted to make a decent living, started out wanting to do law but switched to teaching.

As for people who have gone into the profession for the love of teaching and making a difference yes, I think most people go into their careers with that kind of thinking.

My honest opinion is that some people go into teaching for a variety of reasons including the reasons you've mentioned but as well the reasons sliver has mentioned. At the end of the day, it's a pretty solid job (and good on you teachers) except for the junior high gig. The junior high gig seems treacherous. All other age groups seem manageable.

[Daradon]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

What's harsh? Stating that social media causes those types of problems for kids? That has nothing to do with teachers so I'm not sure what's harsh about it. And I would agree with you that teacher's responsibilities have increased more than what they used to be. Also, it is definitely a shame that teachers can't be as creative with their curriculum.

Anyway, I will be honest. My best friend became a teacher, he was primarily motivated by the pension and the guaranteed job that doesn't suffer from a cyclical business environment like oil and gas and that you can't really get fired. He always wanted to make a decent living, started out wanting to do law but switched to teaching.

As for people who have gone into the profession for the love of teaching and making a difference yes, I think most people go into their careers with that kind of thinking.

My honest opinion is that some people go into teaching for a variety of reasons including the reasons you've mentioned but as well the reasons sliver has mentioned. At the end of the day, it's a pretty solid job (and good on you teachers) except for the junior high gig. The junior high gig seems treacherous. All other age groups seem manageable.

Thanks for the reply.

I think we overlap on some of our points, just approaching it different ways.

Cliff was right, we spend a lot. The solution is probably not more spending. However something is terribly twisted around. Even from a student side, most students and parents are upset about the level of care or teaching.

I'm not just advocating for teachers, I'm advocating for students. It's the whole premise this thread is based on. A frustrated teacher who wants to do better and is against salary hikes.

But blaming teachers is misguided and inaccurate. The system is broke, not the teachers.

As for your social media complaint, to me it's a non starter. I don't see the relevance. Social media my highlight the craziness in our cultures and arguments, but it's far from a measuring stick.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by kootenayguy9

As a teacher for almost twenty years I find this an accurate description of the complex nature of our classrooms.

When I read this (and it could very well be accurate and the case), it suggests that teachers aren't well equipped to deal with these challenges. Maybe we need more of an emphasis on psych training and strategies from psychology in general to be available?

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Slava

When I read this (and it could very well be accurate and the case), it suggests that teachers aren't well equipped to deal with these challenges. Maybe we need more of an emphasis on psych training and strategies from psychology in general to be available?

These are basically education aids, who can specialize in a variety of different teaching or behavioural intervention methods.

The ideal solution of course is to have smaller classes sizes supplemented with educational assistants.

My personal opinion is over a certain threshold, additional children have a multiplying effect in a classroom. 1 or 2 extra students doesn't sound like a lot, but it really is at any age group.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by bizaro86

Was that in Freakonomics by any chance?

It could of been I chew through a lot of the socioeconomic books and podcast

[driveway]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

These are basically education aids, who can specialize in a variety of different teaching or behavioural intervention methods.

The ideal solution of course is to have smaller classes sizes supplemented with educational assistants.

My personal opinion is over a certain threshold, additional children have a multiplying effect in a classroom. 1 or 2 extra students doesn't sound like a lot, but it really is at any age group.

Ideal class size, from my experience - I don't know offhand of data to support this - is either 18 or 12 students. Grades K-8 it's 18 students. There are enough voices in the room to provide differences in ideas and opinions, you've got enough personalities for kids to find like-minded friends, the number 18 divides really well into a whole bunch of different-sized groupings, but it's a totally manageable number of kids, there's the opportunity to get to each one individually and spend focused time with them.

Grades 9-12 I prefer 12 students. Again, this number divides really easily into groups, you have even more opportunity to spend focused time with each student, there is more chance for kids to have their voices heard. Get lower than 12 though and kids can start to get sick of each other. You end up with very dominant voices controlling a lot of classroom discussion.

[TheAlpineOracle]

I'll tell you one thing, I went to school with a lot of people who became teachers and they certainly don't do themselves any favours in the court of public opinion on their social media. Come off as a bunch of absolute bafoons. Stupid comments about their students, bragging about March Breaks, bragging about paid PD days, etc. Even worse are the ones that stayed back East. They get a ton of snow days back there, and they start countdowns about two days before the storm until they get a day off, spend the day bragging about staying at home, and if it doesn't happen the whine like toddlers at a toy store who were told no. It's pretty pathetic and embarrassing to their profession. Not sure why it' expected that everyone else go to work except or teachers. I understand the safety of the children on buses and walking, but there's no reason the teachers aren't required to go to work on a snow day even though the children aren't there.

[Major Major]

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

I'll tell you one thing, I went to school with a lot of people who became teachers and they certainly don't do themselves any favours in the court of public opinion on their social media. Come off as a bunch of absolute bafoons. Stupid comments about their students, bragging about March Breaks, bragging about paid PD days, etc. Even worse are the ones that stayed back East. They get a ton of snow days back there, and they start countdowns about two days before the storm until they get a day off, spend the day bragging about staying at home, and if it doesn't happen the whine like toddlers at a toy store who were told no. It's pretty pathetic and embarrassing to their profession. Not sure why it' expected that everyone else go to work except or teachers. I understand the safety of the children on buses and walking, but there's no reason the teachers aren't required to go to work on a snow day even though the children aren't there.

So far the most powerful arguments against teachers (don't know why discussion about teachers frequently turns into us vs. Them...) is that people have annoying friends. This is a personal problem, easily fixed. It's definitely not a teacher problem.

[Poster]

the problems in the school system are very complex but there are a few areas that can make an immediate impact.

every dollar spent on administration and beaurcracy is a dollar not spent in the classroom on the kids.

other than the obvious answer (politics) there is NO reason for the city of Calgary to carry the expense of two unique school boards and systems. whatever amount of money is spent on this is money not spent in the classroom.

start there and there would be more money for real resources.

also, why should a teacher spend their own after tax dollar on teaching supplies? if little Jenny needs a special tool or some other resource, the parents should pay for it and if they dont want to, why should it be the teachers priority?

i imagine if a principle or school board trustee had to print a report at home, they would expense the printer ink for their home office. why should these elitist self important beuracrats have that perk but the teacher should pay out of their own pocket?

teachers in alberta make more than enough money, thats not an issue but if i had a choice to pay a teacher more or pay a principle or school board leach, i would give it to the teacher 10 out of 10 times.

finally, can we do away with the damn fundraisers? seems silly that my kid asks you to buy the fundraiser pizza and your kid asks me to buy the fundraiser turkey!!

how about putting the kids to work in the community, starting with keeping the schools clean (bathrooms, halways, snow shovelling etc) perhaps cleaning parks or other civic duties, reducing the overheads of the city so that some of that money can go back to the school system instead of recylcling the same dollar from the parents.

(pardon spelling, it is early and yes i get the irony but i cant be bothered to go and fix it all)

[Harry Lime]

Two quick things.

Poster ^ one thing that hasn't been brought up until now, that is interesting. Supporting both the Catholic and Public school boards. It really does feel like it's basically supporting to streams of administration and little else. Most of the people that I know that have gone through the Catholic system, really had no effect on their belief systems. Church and Home seem like the ideal places for religion.

I was actually wondering, as a result of that comment, whether the new Muslim campus that is being built will also end up as a third wheel of support for the educational system to deal with? Is it purely privately funded? Tax free or not? (I actually have some serious worries about curriculum issues there as well, but no use in derailing the thread)

The second thing that I would like to mention is in relation to the class size issue raised by the OP. Earlier in the year, I was helping a friend set up a classroom in an attempt to sit 36 kids in the two biggest classes. The other four classes sat 32 or less, and weren't an issue, as the class fit 32 chairs and tables. We ended up having to bring in two extra desks to put in front of the doorway (yes, it still opened comfortably) and the extra kids sat at the teachers desk.

One of the classes was a dash two stream, and the rules that the province put in a couple of years ago means that they all had laptops in front of them for each class. My friend is a fantastic teacher, and makes situations like this work, but the the physical and emotional toll regulating a classroom like that is immense.

[John Doe]

Originally Posted by Poster

the problems in the school system are very complex but there are a few areas that can make an immediate impact.

every dollar spent on administration and beaurcracy is a dollar not spent in the classroom on the kids.

other than the obvious answer (politics) there is NO reason for the city of Calgary to carry the expense of two unique school boards and systems. whatever amount of money is spent on this is money not spent in the classroom.

The reason that there are two unique school systems is because it is mandated in the constitution, although this appears to still apply only in Alberta, Ontario and Saskatchewan.
I agree with you that this shouldn't still be the case anymore in Alberta, but that is a matter for the government and the courts to decide.

start there and there would be more money for real resources.

also, why should a teacher spend their own after tax dollar on teaching supplies? if little Jenny needs a special tool or some other resource, the parents should pay for it and if they dont want to, why should it be the teachers priority?

I don't believe that teachers are responsible for purchasing resources required for specific students. That would indeed be the responsibility of either the parent or the school district. The resources that teachers have to purchase on their own are items such as posters, books (but not required text books), and extra book shelves, desks, tables that the teachers want to have in their class rooms.

i imagine if a principle or school board trustee had to print a report at home, they would expense the printer ink for their home office. why should these elitist self important beuracrats have that perk but the teacher should pay out of their own pocket?

My SO is a principal. She never expenses items like printing ink back through the school district. My wife and I are the ones who subsidize those and other related expenses. She also is required to travel to and back to the school on weekends and evenings when there are any issues with the school whenever some group is using the gymnasium (for free). Again, her expenses and time to do this is covered by us (although to be fair she is usually at the school working most evenings and weekends already).

teachers in alberta make more than enough money, thats not an issue but if i had a choice to pay a teacher more or pay a principle or school board leach, i would give it to the teacher 10 out of 10 times.

My wife was a teacher for more than 20 years before she became a principal. I can tell you that while she worked an enormous amount of time outside of classroom hours as a teacher, she got an increase in salary but is making much less money per hour worked as a principal.

finally, can we do away with the damn fundraisers? seems silly that my kid asks you to buy the fundraiser pizza and your kid asks me to buy the fundraiser turkey!!

The fundraising is required to fund programs and equipment that are not paid for by the government. If you wish these things to be funded, then you should tell your MLA. If you don't think that these things are required, then don't participate.

how about putting the kids to work in the community, starting with keeping the schools clean (bathrooms, halways, snow shovelling etc) perhaps cleaning parks or other civic duties, reducing the overheads of the city so that some of that money can go back to the school system instead of recylcling the same dollar from the parents.

Are you seriously asking the schools to become child labor sweatshops?




I have been around teachers for most of my adult life. I have seen a good number of great teachers and also a lot of "duds", but then again so do all vocations. While teachers do have some wonderful perks to their jobs (lots of time off, good pension, the job itself can be very rewarding), there are also lots of aspects to the job that are not appealing, such as the long hours they are required to work (that they don't get paid for), increasingly difficult duties (often asked to be psychologist, parent, nurse, counselor, etc.), overcrowded classrooms, demanding parents, etc.. I know that I wouldn't have lasted in their jobs as I would have either burnt out or got fired for telling someone to go to **** off. I also know a number of ex-teachers that have left the profession. Everyone of them is making more money than they did as teachers and have much more stress-free lives.

I expect a number of disparaging remarks to this post, but I honestly believe that teachers do not get the respect that they deserve in our society. I further believe that the primary reason for this is because such a high percentage of teachers are women. I suspect that if they were mostly men then they would be respected (and paid) more.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by John Doe

I also know a number of ex-teachers that have left the profession. Everyone of them is making more money than they did as teachers and have much more stress-free lives.

Really? Into what jobs? I'm curious, because the teachers I know have backgrounds in social sciences, humanities, and fine arts, and the job market for people with degrees in Sociology and Art History is terrible.

Originally Posted by John Doe

I expect a number of disparaging remarks to this post, but I honestly believe that teachers do not get the respect that they deserve in our society.

Can you name a country where you think teachers do get respect, or do you think this is a global phenomenon? People often cite Finland as a country where teaches are highly qualified and highly respected. It's worth noting that the average salary for a teacher in Finland is $38k US.

Originally Posted by John Doe

I further believe that the primary reason for this is because such a high percentage of teachers are women. I suspect that if they were mostly men then they would be respected (and paid) more.

So where would that increased funding for education come from? Do you think provincial governments would divert money from health care to fund education if more men were teachers? Or would the public be prepared to pay higher taxes?

[TheAlpineOracle]

Originally Posted by Major Major

So far the most powerful arguments against teachers (don't know why discussion about teachers frequently turns into us vs. Them...) is that people have annoying friends. This is a personal problem, easily fixed. It's definitely not a teacher problem.

No the problem is that everyone can name a friend or two that went into teaching for all the wrong reasons, and they are part of a system with no accountability which has the potential to create a train wreck as a result.

I think it's more prevalent today then it was in the past, and I think it's magnified in Alberta, because let's be honest, our school system is full of quite a few people that weren't the pick of the litter coming out of University. Couldn't get jobs in their home Provinces, and moved out here only as a last resort.

That's getting away from my point though, which is that teacher's don't do themselves any favours in the court of public opinion by the comments they make and their constant griping. Everyone else is faces the same pressures they do in every other profession, it just manifests itself in different forms.

One of the most idiotic arguments I hear frequently from teachers/nurses/AHS is that they shouldn't be subject to any rollback or any type of cuts while the private sector suffers because they've never benefited from oil and gas sector like the private sector has. Are they friggen' serious? They are the highest paid in the country. My wife makes probably 30K a year more here than she would in the Maritimes, and 20K more than she would in Ontario.

[automaton 3]

I personally think that teachers need to re-evaluate how their professional association is working (or not working). Is it serving the public interest and the profession well?

Not a criticism but my teacher friends seem to live in a bit of a bubble on some issues. They associate with other teachers in large part, and I believe it becomes an echo chamber.

[John Doe]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Really? Into what jobs? I'm curious, because the teachers I know have backgrounds in social sciences, humanities, and fine arts, and the job market for people with degrees in Sociology and Art History is terrible.

They have gone into construction, publishing, oilfield services, and working in industrial plants. I am not sure what their backgrounds were in, but I don't think that their degrees helped them at all in gaining their positions.

Can you name a country where you think teachers do get respect, or do you think this is a global phenomenon? People often cite Finland as a country where teaches are highly qualified and highly respected. It's worth noting that the average salary for a teacher in Finland is $38k US.

I've never heard that teachers in Finland are highly qualified and highly respected, but I have heard that their education system is very economical compared throughout the world.

Interestingly, in a graph towards the bottom of the following link:

http://www.theguardian.com/teacher-n...ound-the-world

, it shows that the average class size in Finland is 17.8 students while the average class size in Alberta is 25.8 students. I would bet that most teachers in Alberta would take a cut in pay to reduce their class sizes by 69%.

So where would that increased funding for education come from? Do you think provincial governments would divert money from health care to fund education if more men were teachers? Or would the public be prepared to pay higher taxes?

I think that it is a given that Albertans' taxes are insufficient to fund the level of goods and services that we get from government.
For example, you compared Alberta and New Brunswick back in post #29. I supplied a comparison in post #36 of the differences in median incomes in 2013 (which was the most recent data I could find). In 2013, an Albertan with the median average income of $97,390 would pay $7,979.70 in provincial taxes (=8.2% of income) with a GST of 5% on most purchases. A resident of New Brunswick with the median average income of $67,340 would pay $5,866.49 in provincial taxes (=8.7%), IN ADDITION to a HST of 13%. In other words, after the first $26,415.13 spent on goods that are subject to the GST/HST the resident of New Brunswick would pay more tax than the Albertan while earning $30,050 (or 30.8%) less income. And that is to pay teachers in New Brunswick who make $20,000 less than teachers in Alberta. I would say that yes, in comparison to the rest of the country, we don't pay high enough taxes to pay for the education of our children (along with other goods and services).

[John Doe]

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

No the problem is that everyone can name a friend or two that went into teaching for all the wrong reasons, and they are part of a system with no accountability which has the potential to create a train wreck as a result.

I think it's more prevalent today then it was in the past, and I think it's magnified in Alberta, because let's be honest, our school system is full of quite a few people that weren't the pick of the litter coming out of University. Couldn't get jobs in their home Provinces, and moved out here only as a last resort.

That's getting away from my point though, which is that teacher's don't do themselves any favours in the court of public opinion by the comments they make and their constant griping. Everyone else is faces the same pressures they do in every other profession, it just manifests itself in different forms.

One of the most idiotic arguments I hear frequently from teachers/nurses/AHS is that they shouldn't be subject to any rollback or any type of cuts while the private sector suffers because they've never benefited from oil and gas sector like the private sector has. Are they friggen' serious? They are the highest paid in the country. My wife makes probably 30K a year more here than she would in the Maritimes, and 20K more than she would in Ontario.

Here is the median total incomes in Canada in 2013 (the most recent data I could find):

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/tables-tabl...il108a-eng.htm

Here is a list of salaries of teachers in Canada in 2013:

http://www.bctf.ca/uploadedfiles/pub...13-14brief.pdf

There are 4 lists, each comparing minimum and maximum salaries of teachers in two different categories. If you rank the teachers' salaries in respect to the median incomes for each province (e.g.: Alberta minimum salary of Category 5 teacher ($61,333)/Median Alberta Income ($97,390) = 63.0%), Alberta teachers rank 9th out of 10 in 3 of the lists and 10th in the other (note: I didn't include the Territories).

As it says in the article linked to in the OP, the existing contract expires on August 31. In the current contact, the teachers took a 3 year wage freeze and got a 2% raise with a 1% lump payout in the last year. By my math, that is a 3% raise over the last 4 years, so I doubt very much that their standings in the lists will be any better now.

Yes, Alberta teachers make more money than teachers do in any of the other provinces. However, they make less compared to the rest of the citizens of the province than do most of the other teachers in Canada. If you want to bitch about how much teachers in Alberta make then you should be prepared to bitch about how much everyone else in Alberta makes too.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by John Doe

Here is the median total incomes in Canada in 2013 (the most recent data I could find):

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/tables-tabl...il108a-eng.htm

Here is a list of salaries of teachers in Canada in 2013:

http://www.bctf.ca/uploadedfiles/pub...13-14brief.pdf

There are 4 lists, each comparing minimum and maximum salaries of teachers in two different categories. If you rank the teachers' salaries in respect to the median incomes for each province (e.g.: Alberta minimum salary of Category 5 teacher ($61,333)/Median Alberta Income ($97,390) = 63.0%), Alberta teachers rank 9th out of 10 in 3 of the lists and 10th in the other (note: I didn't include the Territories).

Yes, Alberta teachers make more money than teachers do in any of the other provinces. However, they make less compared to the rest of the citizens of the province than do most of the other teachers in Canada. If you want to bitch about how much teachers in Alberta make then you should be prepared to bitch about how much everyone else in Alberta makes too.

Maybe you can explain the relevance because I don't see it.

Its equivalent to a 7-11 clerk bitching that he's underpaid because a welder makes 5 times as much as him.

The comparison of teachers across the provinces is pretty relevant.