Teachers work "really hard'.

[The Coppernian One]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

If the unions ever accepted pay differential (which they won't), it should include what sort of degree they have. For students in social sciences, humanities, and fine arts, teaching is about the best job they can hope for. By a long shot. Which is why teachers are overwhelming drawn from those fields, and few have backgrounds in science, engineering, math, and other technical studies. We'd see more, and better, teachers from those under-represented fields if there was a pay differential.

That's not actually true at all. While many of these people aren't necessarily motivated by money, there are a number of jobs that these people go into and excel in. Business included.

[The Coppernian One]

Originally Posted by GGG

This is a good idea. Pay a math/science teacher 120k max and an English/history teacher 80k max. Base it on alternative career pay.

We should do this because being able to read, write, and think critically has no benefit to society.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by The Coppernian One

We should do this because being able to read, write, and think critically has no benefit to society.

I'd hardly call 80k 'no benefit.' That fact is technical fields are under-represented in K-12 teachers. Jobs markets (where there is a genuine market) operate under the premise of people getting paid the minimum to attract qualified candidates. There's every reason to believe we could attract qualified teachers with less pay (virtually every other country in the world manages to), especially the ones with backgrounds that otherwise do not lead to high-paying work.

I know this kind of talk gets peoples' backs up. But we are going to face a public finance crisis in this country. It might not be for 15 years. It might not be for 20. But it's going to happen. Demographics are undermining the tax base, while the insatiable beast of health care devours bigger and bigger chunks of every budget in the country. Pension plans are based on investment returns that are looking wildly optimistic. We can either knuckle down and try to manage a soft landing, or we can wait until a crisis forces dire measures on us. Measures that will make 10-15 per cent reductions in the compensation of upper-middle-class public servants look like a picnic.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by peter12

I think the number one reason why teaching is so hard is dealing with parents who are a lot like the posters in this thread.

I don't think it's parents in this thread, who actually care what goes on, that you would have to worry about. I would imagine dealing with parents who couldn't possibly care less what little Johnny did that day are worse. That and being sandwiched between parents and admin on a constant basis is probably soul sucking. Most teachers would enjoy the teaching, if only they could do that!

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Slava

I don't think it's parents in this thread, who actually care what goes on, that you would have to worry about. I would imagine dealing with parents who couldn't possibly care less what little Johnny did that day are worse.

If that's a problem, then it was a bigger problem 30-40 years ago. When I was a kid, most parents had little to no involvement in their kids' education. They may show up for parent-teacher interviews - though many did not, especially dads. Looking back at my friends, the only notice most dads gave to their kids' schooling was to look at the report cards twice a year and either do nothing or give the kid hell.

Parents back then rarely took any note of homework, or helped kids with projects or studying. School was the domain of the child, and left to them to sort out. Intervention was required only if grades were unacceptable (and unacceptable typically meant failing). I work with people who have teenagers today and you'd think they were the ones who had exams coming up, with the time they spend tutoring and preparing their kids. From my perspective there is way, way more parental involvement in school today than there used to be.

And yeah, when you have more involvement you have more friction between parents and schools. Different ideas of how things should be done. But I still think - and again, this is from my own experience - most parents today happily cooperate with teachers and schools. I'd be curious to hear from a teacher what proportion of parents cause them trouble. One in 10? One in five? Half?

[Slava]

^ I would be interested in that as well. I like to think that we've been 100% supportive of the school and teachers. I do care about the educational system though and I think there is a lot of room for improvement.

[malcolmk14]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

I'd be curious to hear from a teacher what proportion of parents cause them trouble. One in 10? One in five? Half?

Far fewer than that.

In my experience, probably 1 in 50.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

I'd hardly call 80k 'no benefit.' That fact is technical fields are under-represented in K-12 teachers. Jobs markets (where there is a genuine market) operate under the premise of people getting paid the minimum to attract qualified candidates. There's every reason to believe we could attract qualified teachers with less pay (virtually every other country in the world manages to), especially the ones with backgrounds that otherwise do not lead to high-paying work.

I know this kind of talk gets peoples' backs up. But we are going to face a public finance crisis in this country. It might not be for 15 years. It might not be for 20. But it's going to happen. Demographics are undermining the tax base, while the insatiable beast of health care devours bigger and bigger chunks of every budget in the country. Pension plans are based on investment returns that are looking wildly optimistic. We can either knuckle down and try to manage a soft landing, or we can wait until a crisis forces dire measures on us. Measures that will make 10-15 per cent reductions in the compensation of upper-middle-class public servants look like a picnic.

Quoted because I've been banging this drum for a while now and its been a primary concern of mine for a number of years and its gotten ramped up lately due to an NDP Government that is more interested in exacerbating the problem because it placates their support base.

We can do small changes now and try and slowly let the air out of this thing or its all going to explode in our faces.

[heep223]

48 hours a week is a lot?

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Locke

We can do small changes now and try and slowly let the air out of this thing or its all going to explode in our faces.

The thing is, I'm not some libertarian anti-tax crusader. I think strong public services are essential to the well-being of Canadians. But the biggest threat I see to strong public health care, emergency services, and education in the coming decades is overreach and unsustainable spending. The relentess increases to the compensation of teachers, police, nurses, and firefighters, and their defined benefit pensions, are not sustainable. The math simply doesn't work. Not in an economy that is growing at a much lower rate than the economy (and tax base) grew in the 50s to 90s.

Whose job is it to make the tough choices to safeguard public services in the long-term? Politicians? They do what have to do to get elected. Voters? They only care about low taxes and access to school and health care right now. Unions? They're run by baby boomers who are frantically padding their nests for retirement. Civil servants? They might be our best bet. But they're hardly a disinterested party.

BOOM, BUST AND ECONOMIC HEADACHES

The dramatic greying of Canada’s population will reshape the economy, stifle growth and force governments to provide for a growing number of seniors with a shrinking pool of taxpayers

[Clarkey]

It's the Airdrie is 20 mins from downtown self reporting bias.

[The Coppernian One]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

The thing is, I'm not some libertarian anti-tax crusader. I think strong public services are essential to the well-being of Canadians. But the biggest threat I see to strong public health care, emergency services, and education in the coming decades is overreach and unsustainable spending. The relentess increases to the compensation of teachers, police, nurses, and firefighters, and their defined benefit pensions, are not sustainable. The math simply doesn't work. Not in an economy that is growing at a much lower rate than the economy (and tax base) grew in the 50s to 90s.

Whose job is it to make the tough choices to safeguard public services in the long-term? Politicians? They do what have to do to get elected. Voters? They only care about low taxes and access to school and health care right now. Unions? They're run by baby boomers who are frantically padding their nests for retirement. Civil servants? They might be our best bet. But they're hardly a disinterested party.

BOOM, BUST AND ECONOMIC HEADACHES

The dramatic greying of Canada’s population will reshape the economy, stifle growth and force governments to provide for a growing number of seniors with a shrinking pool of taxpayers

I don't think anyone is arguing that some of these things need to be put in check. My comments were based on the idea that we should pay some teachers less because essentially "they're not as important", while giving the others raises.

Public Sector unions are causing a problem (I work in the public sector - not health or education, not Federal, not Provincial and not unionized) and I think everyone agrees that health has become a beast that needs slaying at the management level. Health is even bigger than most realize as many municipal dollars also get put into it for things like attracting doctors, medical first response/EMS firefighters and the power doctors have been given to make some choices that aren't in the best interests of the public.

I would agree that the ATA is likely going to chase the wrong thing (salaries instead of class sizes) and that it's too difficult to remove bad teachers. The current governments' (Provincial and Federal) trying to appease the masses by placing additional burden on high earners is also not going to help that crisis.

[Sainters7]

Originally Posted by malcolmk14

Far fewer than that.

In my experience, probably 1 in 50.

Probably depends what district you're talking about as well (and the grade level). My girlfriend's sister teaches elementary in St. Albert, which I've heard teacher acquaintances there refer to as the "helicopter parent capitol of Alberta", it sounds like there's usually at least one per class they teach. She was telling me over Christmas about one mom that semester who was actively trying to get her fired over some minor thing. Sounds a little crazy there.

Also depends on what you mean by "difficult". Like bad altercations with parents, or even just friendly but higher maintenance situations where you're having to email them every day to keep them up to speed with their kid's performance/behavior? Said she spends about an hour a day emailing with different parents.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by The Coppernian One

We should do this because being able to read, write, and think critically has no benefit to society.

We should do this becaus the supply of English teachers exceeds the demand of English teachers and you have a shortage of math and science teachers.

A civil engineer gets paid less than a resivoir engineer or a process engineer and it isn't because it's not important that buildings don't fall down.

Also 80k per year is probably in the top 5% of what a dedicated English major could get elsewhere in the market.

[OMG!WTF!]

I don't really see a lot of mathematicians rolling in job opportunities. Engineering isn't a course in high school. Someone with an engineering degree still needs to learn how to teach...if i understand correctly it's back to undergrad with you. I don't really get this argument.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by GGG

We should do this becaus the supply of English teachers exceeds the demand of English teachers and you have a shortage of math and science teachers.

Where are you getting this information? You are presenting this as fact, but it appears to be your opinion.

Are there really not enough math and science teachers in Alberta? If so, there must be overcrowded math and science classrooms in the province, or students not being taught these subjects at all. I haven't heard of this, but I'm all ears.

[malcolmk14]

Originally Posted by Sainters7

Probably depends what district you're talking about as well (and the grade level). My girlfriend's sister teaches elementary in St. Albert, which I've heard teacher acquaintances there refer to as the "helicopter parent capitol of Alberta", it sounds like there's usually at least one per class they teach. She was telling me over Christmas about one mom that semester who was actively trying to get her fired over some minor thing. Sounds a little crazy there.

Also depends on what you mean by "difficult". Like bad altercations with parents, or even just friendly but higher maintenance situations where you're having to email them every day to keep them up to speed with their kid's performance/behavior? Said she spends about an hour a day emailing with different parents.

I don't know her situation so I can't really comment on it but that sounds pretty outrageous. I would try to never put myself in the position where something even close to that would be expected of me.

I make it really clear to parents, colleagues, and whomever else that my priority is working with kids to grow their capacity to learn. I'll try my best to make room for other things that come up but if something that is not directly related to children's learning gets in the way of that priority, it may not get done. If I have to choose between e-mailing parents for an hour a day or planning lessons/actually teaching kids - sorry parents, ain't happening.

Not really related to what you're saying but more about the thread in general, I commit about 9-9.5 hours a day during the week to teaching. I feel that's more than enough time to plan, teach, mark, and get a comprehensive grasp on what my students know and how I can help them. Some teachers may feel that's too much, some may feel it's too little. I feel I can do my job pretty well in 9 hours a day. Would I be a more effective teacher if I worked 12 hours a day and 6 on weekends? Maybe. Would I be miserable and probably not love my job as much? Definitely. I think kids learn best from teachers who love teaching them.

I try really hard to get everything done at school, I try not to bring work home except for report card time. I see both ends of the spectrum, teachers burning the midnight oil and putting in 70 hour weeks, and teachers who do half that. I don't want to be either of those people.

[The Coppernian One]

Originally Posted by OMG!WTF!

I don't really see a lot of mathematicians rolling in job opportunities. Engineering isn't a course in high school. Someone with an engineering degree still needs to learn how to teach...if i understand correctly it's back to undergrad with you. I don't really get this argument.

I know one. She couldn't find anything until she went back and got an Education degree. Now she's a teacher. Working at a starting teacher's wage. No pay raise needed.

[bigtmac19]

I also agree that the teachers that are just marking time in their job need to go. The years that my kids had teachers that were engaged and loved doing what they do, they did really well and enjoyed school, but there were a few years, with a few REALLY bad teachers and it was awful to get through. As a parent it's really hard to encourage your kids and try to keep them positive through a bad school year. Definitely leaves a bad taste toward teachers after going through that. This becomes even worse in high school, where the crop of teachers who don't GAS seems to be much much larger. I wish I had kept track of the number of movies, etc. that both my boy watched during high school years, it seemed ridiculous.


So thank you to those teachers that care and love their jobs, you are always remembered by kids and parents alike, and forever appreciated.

[Regulator75]

Originally Posted by WinnipegFan

As a teacher I have faced many of the discussions that are coming up in this thread. I agree with many of the criticisms we face and I agree that the ATA is acting in a political fashion right now. I have never seen such a bombardment of ATA commercials on TV in my life. I also started a thread on this forum stating that I, for one, and many of my colleagues do not want more money. In fact I will come forward and say we are very well compensated for the work we do. Is it challenging, yes, is it more challenging than any other job, no. I do fall in the camp of teachers who have had a number of professions throughout my life and to that end I can put it into perspective. I have worked in factories, managed restaurants, been a bartender, worked construction, written standard manuals with engineers, worked in chemical labs, made sandwiches, and even at one point I pumped gas as a teen. When I started teaching it was the first time in my life I ever had one job and the transition was interesting.
I found myself surrounded by people who, as many of you have stated, never left the education system. At times this is frustrating as many of them live in a bit of an ideological cloud that lacks reality. The current trend in education is to try and reflect this reality in our practice and it is, in my opinion, a positive trend. However, when this comes at the cost of academic soundness it is a challenge.
I don't want to derail this into a discussion in regards to education pedagogy so I will stick to the do teachers "work hard" thread title. Yes we work hard, but not as hard as when I hauled cement on a work site. Is it tiring to manage children, yep, but not as tiring as when I had to run a restaurant. Are class sizes too large, absolutely, and this should be the ATAs only goal in this negotiation.
If you want to drill down into any profession you will find they all are facing challenges. I am married to a stock trader/banker and I could not last one day in her job. As far as I can tell the trading desk is a foreign battle field where I would literally be fodder. However, could she do my job, probably not she'd have a line up of kids crying in the office in mere minutes. To compare the two in any way is a waste of time. Is she better compensated than I am, absolutely, but she earns every penny. Does she also think my job is hard, sure, because she could never have the patience to teach little Jimmy over and over how 2+2 = 4 until he gets it.
The key, I think, is we both LOVE what we do. I knew what I was getting into and she knew what she was getting into. So comparing how hard each of us works versus the other is redundant. We do need to focus on how the education dollars we currently have are being spent. We need to evaluate those who make the big decisions in education and hold them accountable. Targeting the front line teachers is pointless, we have little power or say over what is happening. It is the same as yelling at your meter reader about your high utility bill while he really is just doing the best he can to run to the increased number of houses he has to get to in order to meet his quota.

I find the lack of spacing and paragraphs alarming, see me after class.