Showing posts with label salaries. Show all posts
Showing posts with label salaries. Show all posts

Friday, March 16, 2012

Survey Finds Teachers Don't Trust State Tests (And This is News?)


Earlier this week, USA Today published the results of a recent survey of 10,000 teachers in which only 16% believed that linking student performance and teacher pay was "absolutely essential" or "very important" in retaining good teachers, down from 28% in 2010. Barely half of the teachers felt like the policy would make any difference at all, down from 65% in 2010. Only 26% believed the tests were an “accurate reflection of student achievement.”

The survey was conducted by the educational publisher Scholastic, and was funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

What’s Worse: Being Exploited by Capitalism or Not Being Exploited by Capitalism?
Sadly, the number of teachers who thought that higher pay was necessary to retain good teachers also declined from 86% in 2010 to 75% in the recent survey. This does not necessarily mean that they have given up on decent wages. Rather, it probably reflects their own insecurity about the economy and the fact that most have taken pay cuts over the past three years, either actual or de facto through wage freezes, but nonetheless continued to teach because the job prospects elsewhere were so dismal.

Thursday, November 24, 2011

What Are Teachers Worth?


Huck/Konopacki Labor Cartoons
Capitalists build their wealth primarily through the exploitation of workers. They do this by paying them as little as possible while squeezing as much work out of them as they can. In effect, they pay their workers less than the value of the goods and services they produce. The greater the difference between workers’ salaries and the value of these goods and services the greater the profits. This simple fact helps explain why, even though worker productivity has been steadily increasing over the past 50 years, the purchasing power of their income and their leisure time have been stagnant or declining.

This principle is fairly obvious in the private sector, where goods and services are sold on the open market. It becomes a little hazier in the public sector, where workers are paid by the government out of tax revenues. Yet even here, the work that is done is done to help maintain the property and profits of ruling elite (i.e., the 1%). The workers are still providing services to consumers. Teachers, for example, have the responsibility of helping to ensure that some children grow up with the skills required to become the future managers, administrators and bosses, while the vast majority gain just enough skills to become their employees. Nurses help keep people healthy enough to stay on the job or return to work after an illness or injury. If too many people are home sick for too long, productivity starts to decline, as do profits.

The question is, how do we calculate the value of these services?

The value of a good or service can be estimated based on what people are willing to pay for it. With education, for example, people typically pay between $10,000 and $20,000 per year to send their children to modest private schools, and considerably more for the elite ones. For a teacher working in small privates school classes of 20 students, this comes to $200,000-$400,000 per year. For those of us working in one of California’s bloated classrooms of 35-38 students, this comes to $350,000-$700,000 per year.

One might argue that tuition (or public school funding) must cover numerous other costs in addition to teacher salaries, like rent, supplies, maintenance, administrative costs and salaries of nonteaching staff. The same argument is often made with regards the private sector (e.g., the costs of raw materials, rent, investment costs and the value of the owners’ willingness to risk his money). However, in both cases, nothing gets done and no profits are possible without the workers who produce the goods and services in question. These other costs are often nominal compared with salaries. But most importantly, it is the bosses’ ability to pay workers less than their labor is worth that allows them to grow their capital and earn their profits. A business owner can invest in property or machinery, but without employees, the shelves remain empty. Likewise, in a school devoid of teachers, learning is limited.

Technically, a school could be run entirely by the teachers and support staff, without any administrators at all. It could be run collectively, with workers’ councils making operating, as well as pedagogical decisions. However, it is not just site administrators that could be downsized. Most districts are quite top-heavy at their district headquarters, with superintendents and numerous assistant and associate superintendents, all garnering six-figure salaries. Schools that are run by the workers have no need for all this management. Even a small district of only five or six schools may have 2-3 administrators at each school site, plus another 3-5 working downtown, at a cost of $2-5 million.

Another significant but unnecessary cost to public schools that has little to do with children’s education and wellbeing is accountability. Schools spend millions on standardized tests, curricular support for the tests, and software to analyze the tests. Not only is this a huge waste of money, it is money that could go to teacher remuneration. Instead, it is used to manipulate and control teachers, forcing them to work longer and harder in hopes of raising test scores, taking time and energy away from teaching as well as organizing and advocating for better working conditions.
Pizza is a Vegetable (from Flickr, Mike Licht, NotionsCapital.com)
Educational bureaucracies, in general, divert large sums of money away from education, as well as educators’ salaries. But they do open the doors for numerous private sector entrepreneurs to grab a little piece of the action, like multibillion dollar text book and processed food giants. Thus, instead of well-paid teachers and well-fed students, we get overworked, burned out teachers and malnourished students who get their daily dose of vegetables from the tomato paste on their pizzas.

Friday, February 18, 2011

Stop Whining--Teachers Salaries Are A Good Deal!


Here’s an interesting piece by Sittercityspeaks (thanks to Chris at Education Matters for finding it)

Maybe that's all teachers should be until society gets its priorities straight. –cpg (Education Matters)

by sittercityspeaks

We came recently came across a blog by a soon-to-be first-year teacher who was making the point that, despite complaints to the contrary, teachers are NOT overpaid. (Not sure who he’s been talking to, since we rarely hear that claim!) Nonetheless, here’s what he says he would make if teachers were paid like babysitters.

He starts by saying that all of this will be based on the average babysitter rate of $5/hour.

Note: The national average for babysitting is actually $10-12/hour for college-age babysitters. Check out our Rate Calculator to get a much more specific idea about what babysitters in your neighborhood are actually making.

Teacher wage per hour: $5 per hour for each student.
Average number of students per class: 22.
Average number of hours per day a teacher works: 7 hours.
Average number of days per year a teacher works: 180.

Class, let’s pull out our calculators.

Remember this? The calculator from hell.

The blogger continues…

22 students at $5 per hour = $110 per hour.
$110 per hour multiplied 7 hours a day = $770 per day.
$770 per day multiplied 180 days a year = $138,600.

He also argues that on top of this, most teachers put in an extra “three to four hours a day preparing, assessing, tutoring and participating in extracurricular events to ensure the success of their students.” Based on that, plus the fact that the average rate of babysitters is around $10/hour, his calculator should actually be well more than doubled… in the high $300,000s.

How’s THAT for a starting salary?