vision2020
Re: Comparing Professionals
John Danahy writes:
> Why is it that when we talk about teacher pay Vs pay of other professions,
> we never compare training, accountability, results, or true work load.
> When teachers are trained to the same high standards as other
professionals,
> when they are held personally accountable as other professionals, when
every
> child is given a quality education that meets the child's individual
needs,
> then pay teachers what they're worth.
Ah, but here's the flaw in your logic -- not all teachers are "worth" the
same (gasp!!!). My wife has an elementary education degree. How does that
compare to someone having a math/science degree with a teaching certificate?
In our current climate, not at all -- because our government school teachers
are paid based on their *level* of education and years of teaching
experience. A teacher with a master's in elementary education and 10 years
experience gets paid exactly the same as a math teacher in the same
situation.
There's *no* merit behind that system whatsoever. Everyone readily admits
that there are severe shortages of math and science teachers; but rather
than paying them more, the shortage is used quite illogically as an argument
for paying *all* teachers more.
A freshman economics course will tell you what happens when an elementary
ed's salary is too high for the market and the math teacher's is too low --
a surplus of the prior and a shortage of the latter; and that's exactly what
we have today: a government- and union-sponsored shortage of critical
teachers.
Rather, there should be a system of merit pay for teachers: People who
perform better should be rewarded, and this gives everyone the incentive to
improve performance. Such a simple idea is too controversial among
teachers -- the NEA and AFT are against pay differentials based on the
teaching field.
While there is no question that pay differentials can be used to both
attract better teachers and to give an incentive for better performance, pay
differentials must be used for fields which are paid more outside the
teaching profession. Math and science teachers should be paid more *not*
because they are inherently better teachers, but because such differentials
are necessary in the competitive marketplace for such skills.
As Jack Wenders wrote elsewhere: "teachers who know how to play the game:
Accumulate years in service and college credits and your salary will
automatically go up no matter how you do in the classroom. Proposals to
change this threatens a strong, and frightened, constituency which has a
vested interest in the present pay system, even though there is almost
uniform agreement that it has produced a pubic school system which has
serious inadequacies."
But, alas, this goes back to the strangle-hold of the government teachers
unions and the lack of market-forces in our government schools -- the
standard consequences of a government-sponsored monopoly. Until we fix these
fundamental problems (among others), we will continue to have mediocrity at
the highest cost.
Dale Courtney
Moscow, Idaho
Pro-educational choice
Back to TOC