Paying for Better Math and Science Teachers

Coryoth writes "While California is suffering from critical shortage of mathematics and science teachers, Kentucky is considering two bills that would give explicit financial incentives to math and science students and teachers. The first bill would provide cash incentives to schools to run AP math and science classes, and cash scholarships to students who did well on AP math and science exams. The second bill provides salary bumps for any teachers with degrees in math or science, or who score well in teacher-certification tests in math, chemistry and physics. Is such differentiated pay the right way to attract science graduates who can make much more in industry, or is it simply going to breed discontent among teachers?"

Comments

Teacher shortage?

[bdr529]

If there is, as the article suggests, a "critical shortage of mathematics and science teachers" in CA, and that the "problem with advanced math and science is that those with the education to teach it can make a lot more money not teaching it", then it should be painfully obvious that if you wish to correct this "shortage" of talent, you'll need to up the pay scale of math and science teachers to make it an attractive career choice.

Either that, or enslave post-grads for a few years and FORCE them to work at public school wages. That'll work... Yeah.

Is such differentiated pay the right way to attract science graduates who can make much more in industry, or is it simply going to breed discontent among teachers?"

I hate "IS/OR" questions like this. The answer to both is YES. Pay which is competative with industry will attract science grads to teach. It will also cause "discontent among teachers" who somehow feel that all teachers should earn the same -- regardless of education/demand for certain skillsets.

Queue the teachers union to strike/protest.

Re:Teacher shortage?

[Coryoth]

You know, one of the proponents from the original article makes that very point:
"He pointed out that an English teacher doesn't have to be a great writer to teach reading and writing, but that the same is not true of high-end math and science courses." I think this is an important point. It can be overstated, but real fluency in mathematics can make a great deal of difference to how well it is taught. Most students can appreciate the value of learning to read or write, but will more often tend to question the value of mathematics. It takes a teacher with good mathematical knowledge (often well beyond the level they are teaching) to provide the extra depth to mathematics that can help engage students. Finland noted this around 2000 and set up a series of reforms that saw strong encouragement for elementary school teachers to take advanced math classes. The result is that Finland is now ranked among the very top countries in the world with respect to the achievements of their students in mathematics.

Of course, at the higher levels of English, having a teacher well versed in literature can make all the difference with regard to engaing students in studying Shakespeare and the classics. I don't think you should sell short the value of a well educated English teacher - it is just that that value tends be increase later in schooling rather than earlier.

Re:Teacher shortage?

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem is that a person with a science or math degree can get a job that pays 40-80K right out of college, where a teacher's salary starts around 30 and doesn't really go much higher than that.
You need to keep in mind that teachers do not work 40+ hours/week and they get the summers off. Pay rate would be better expressed in dollars per hour. My wife is an English teacher (a damn good one too!) and I'm a sofware engineer. My yearly salary is more than twice hers, but if you count the hours (counting 50hrs/week for me) she gets better pay per hour. Your right, teachers don't work 40 hours per week. On a typical day, I am at school from 7 am to 3 pm (8 hours x 5). Every Tuesday there is a staff meeting, lasting about an hour. I also have students stay after school until around 4 at least once a week, especially if we have a test the following day. Then I get to go home and spend time grading, writing lesson plans, creating assignments, etc., all of which work out to about 6 hours per week. So that brings me pretty close to your 50 hours per week.

As for summers off, keep in mind that most (good) teachers use that time to further their own education, whether its working towards the Master's degree that you are required to obtain within 5 years, or taking addition subject courses to enhance the students' experiences and expand the number of courses the teacher can teach.

What people not in the education field also do not take into account is the sheer exhaustion that comes from teaching. Imagine having to give a 45 minutes presentation to 25 co-workers every day. Now imagine doing it 4-5 times per day. And keep in mind, it has to be a DIFFERENT presentation every day. And it damn well better be entertaining...and interactive...and inquiry-based.

In conclusion, this comment is not the ranting of a disgruntled teacher who feels the world owes him a big "thank you". I love teaching and, at least right now, can't think of anything else I'd rather do for a career. I just want to try to set the record straight on how much work goes into "getting summers off".

Re:Teacher shortage?

[jeppster]

...teachers do not work 40+ hours/week
False. My wife (8th grade teacher) gets to work at 7:25 and leaves usually at 4:00. She usually spends an average of 1 hour every night doing extra work. Her lunch hour is about 40 minutes. That adds up to 50 hours a week when you include the extra weekend work.

...and they get the summers off
True. Almost three months is a LOT of vacation. I'd say she gets 14 weeks off over the course of a year. That translates to 560 hours of a 40 hour week.

Now, consider that 50 hours a week times the 38 weeks of working = 1900 hours. That brings up a net difference of 100 hours of extra work I do over the course of a year (assuming standard 2000 hour year). The ratio of her total hours to my total hours (0.95) compared to the ratio of her salary to my salary (software developer) (0.65) is not encouraging.

May backfire

[crow]

Depending on how this is funded, it may backfire. If the state is paying the salary difference directly, that may work, but otherwise school districts will avoid hiring teachers who qualify for the extra pay to keep within budget. The system already makes it quite difficult for experienced teachers to get jobs; my wife was once told by a principal that he would love to hire her, but the superintendent said he would only approve up to three years of experience.

Simple logic

[TheRealMindChild]

Teachers face the same hurdles that you may experience in the IT field. Most of us have been in the position where you ae looking to take on a job that you are more than qualified for. You get the "We think you are overqualified for this position", which translates to "You are bound to want too much money". The same applies to teachers.

Re:We have a winner!

[Jordan Catalano]

Wait a sec...

or is it simply going to breed discontent among under-qualified teachers?

Fixed it.

Why I'm Not a Teacher

[Paulrothrock]

I'd like to be a teacher. Some of the greatest influences on my life have been teachers. I like teaching kids science and computers, and I've got a talent for it.

But I'll never be a teacher under current systems.

I'm not patient with kids who don't get it and insist on me walking them through everything. None of my favorite teachers were either. I'm not respectful of authority either, unless it's earned that respect. None of my favorite teachers were either. And if parents insist that little Taylor or Brittany didn't earn the C they got on the test, I'll tell them where they can shove their complaints. And I'm not about to waste my time teaching kids for a test. Some of the best lessons in life can't be tested. I'd reward kids for creativity, an inquisitive nature, the questioning of current thinking, and for making me look dumb. All the kinds of things my favorite teachers rewarded me for.

I feel that, in this current climate, I wouldn't last a year as that kind of teacher. In fact, two of my favorite teachers got fired after I had them because of complaints and friction with the administration. And they were replaced with robots designed to make more robots. Indeed, most of the teachers I remember fondly only lasted as long as they did because they produced results despite friction with the administration and parents.

Re:Why I'm Not a Teacher

[richieb]

I'm not patient with kids who don't get it and insist on me walking them through everything.

Good thing you are not a teacher. What you are saying that you could do that job only when it's easy. Anyone can.

Being able to control, teach and inspire kids that are not at all interested in the subject is something that a great teacher can do. That's where the art of teaching comes in.

I taught computer programming adults who were quite motivated to learn. This was a piece of case. My wife teaches engilish to 7th graders in an urban school. After few months all her students love her and many learn to love literature. Teaching in that environment is a completely different skill.

Re:if it breeds discontent, so be it.

[garcia]

A central tenet of the school pay system appears to be their main stumbling block

That's a stumbling block of *all* unionized workplaces. Instead of paying people based on their performance they pay everyone based on their years in.

This type of reward system creates an environment that's filled with indifference. "Why should I work hard and come up with new and exciting lesson plans when I'm going to be paid exactly the same as Bob Smith who sits on his tenured ass and doesn't engage the students at all?"

It's a real problem where I used to work and it was compounded with supervisors that have limited budgets and individuals used to receiving their yearly raises and not looking for upward advancement. So you have people that do nothing more than the bare minimum, don't have any goals, and are just happy to be great at making themselves look busier than they really are while complaining that Joe is working hard and making them look bad.

Re:Here is a thought

[NETHED]

EXACTLY! Not everyone should go to college. I know far to many "business" majors, or "communications" majors who leave college after 4-5 years of drunkenness (see face-book...) with a huge student loan and expect to earn 50K+ per year. Then the reality of the marketplace hits like a ton of bricks and you have these 'grads' earning a bit above minimum wage working retail or something unrelated to their college education.

There is an unhealthy stigma that goes along with people not going to college, and I disagree with it. College, while wonderful for some, is not good for others. 2 year trade schools, or apprenticeships should be encouraged far more than they are. And this is relevant to the topic because the students are told by their teachers that if they don't go to college, they will be useless to society. (or at least thats how I was taught)

There is a problem with the teaching system in the United States, and it starts with the students being far too empowered. If little Johnny does something wrong, teacher (rightly!) punishes Johnny, he cries to Mommy, and Mommy sides with Johnny. Teacher's hands are tied and so they stop caring. I have plenty of friends that are teachers, and this is a common story. There are more problems, but I firmly believe that the problem originates at discipline.

Re:We have a winner!

[endianx]

I agree with most of your post.

Teachers work their asses off Some teachers work their asses off. And those teachers deserve to be paid more than the ones that don't. As I understand it, that is not the way it is now and teacher's unions go crazy whenever somebody tries to change it.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:We have a winner!

[Cramer]

You obviously don't work in education. Public schools are run more by politics than credentials and experience. There are lots of people able and willing to teach, but they will not put up with the crap pay and bullshit politics to do it.

Re:We have a winner!

[bendodge]

Teachers are not teachers anymore, they are babysitters.This sentence was not only relavent to the issue in the article, but is characteristic of so many of the problems with our education system right now from parents expecting schools to raise their kids and teach them values to our failing grades compared with the rest of the world. I don't think that its just the bureaucracy of structured classes, but with the teachers' lack of ability to control a classroom. Of course, that's a whole other can of worms. Yes, that is a huge can of worms.

My father has been a teacher for almost 20 years, and describes the life cycle of a teacher like this:

1. Someone becomes a teacher, not for the pay, but in order to better the world.
2. They are very enthusiastic, and spin their wheels with enthusiasm.
3. About 5-10 years into it, they get cynical. But with that many years behind them, they are not going to switch careers. He also discussed the government programs issue:

1. A program is created and deployed with high hopes (except for the cynical teachers who have been through the last 3 programs.)
2. It generates a lot of (fake) steam, then is loopholed and "special-ed"ed out of commission, at which point everybody forgets the name.
3. The program is about to expire, and everything will go back to traditional mode. This creates a lawsuit hazard, as tens of thousands of students suddenly must pass a test or miss their diploma.
4. A new program is hastily implemented to keep the scores inflated and keep to the students rolling through (read: no lawsuits). Another problem is "special ed". Here is the story behind 85% of the students in special ed:

1. A student is ultra-lazy and isn't passing.
2. Parents roar at the teacher, and send their kid to the school shrink. At this point the student pays attention and dons his worst intellect, in order to pass the evaluation.
3. He is assigned a monitor who is specially responsible to keep an eye on his school (read: make sure he passes).
4. The student has a lot less work to do (the basic package is 1/2 the homework, and it gets worse as you go along), and the teacher is given a dossier (they have some politically correct name for it) on the kid's "condition", and he is required to tailor his lessons for that child's benefit. (There is naturally no way a teacher can tailor the class for a dozen individual kids.)
5. The student passes with good grades, and gets his diploma. He got by with minimal work, the parents are happy, and nobody got sued.
5. Since you can't discriminate against the handicapped or retarded, the diploma has no mention of the fact that the student didn't actually do the work, or that he has any condition. Now, the program does do much good for the truly handicapped people, but there are very few people who have anything wrong with them, except for their work ethic.

As for classroom discipline:

1. You cannot touch or search a kid without getting sued by the parents or the ACLU.
2. You cannot dock their grade without the parents getting zealous.
3. You may only send them to the office, where the overworked principle (who spends "half his time making sure we comply with regulations") tells the student to behave or face staying home from school (sounds silly, but it really irks the parents, who suddenly have a kid to babysit).
4. If the teacher saw the kid's drugs, the principle calls the students mom to come (no way will he tell the kid to drop his pants for a search without a parent present). The kid is then sent to the school police officer, and I don't know what he does with him.
5. There isn't much else to do. It is a general case of lazy kids, a lawyer-happy ACLU, terrible parenting, and staggering bureaucratic overhead.

Re:We have a winner!

[AK Marc]

I can attest to the fact that the rigmarole educators are put through today is a major turnoff.

I graduated from Texas A&M. Because I was in the electrical engineering program before changing to computer science and there was one non-overlap math class, I actually have more math than needed to be an electrical engineer (and that, I believe, ties for the most math needed for any degree, after math majors of course). So, when I was looking at possibly teaching, I found out that I would have to go back and take some remedial math classes. Sure, a couple semesters of differential equations won't help me with algebra, but to go back for remedial math after having taken years of calculus and applied math just turned me off. I can pass any test they can give me about the subject matter. But unless I go back for the remedial math classes, I can't teach it. What is needed is an easy path for professionals to enter education after years of gathering experience in the real world. Until that path is easy, I'm not going to go back to school for 2 years just to be able to apply for the jobs. They should be seeking me out, not putting up hurdles.

Not so fast...

[enmane]

This is where the problem lies...

Being knowledgeable and being a good teacher are 2 completely different things. How do I know?
Glad you asked,

I'm a PhD student in Mech. Engineering at a top 10 school working through the NSF GK-12 Fellowship program and putting in 30hrs/week at a local school. Believe me when I tell you that being smart and being a good teacher at that level are 2 completely different things and I've been decorated and distinguished as a TA from our undergrads and the department. Middle/High School is a different ball game ENTIRELY.

I've learned to keep my mouth shut when it comes to criticizing our educational system - my advise, donate your time to a local school and you'll quickly learn why you love your job so much. It's dang hard work with very little reward other than the smiles on their faces.

This was after a 3 week (50hr/week) summer intensive course on education - there are education theories out there that make a lot of sense and work. You wouldn't know this because the vast majority of my teachers haven't followed them. There is more to being a good educator then being smart in your field - it requires being knowledgeable in the theories of education also.

That said, I find that the teachers at my school to be extremely petty (maybe it's a catfighting thing) but the politics are horrible and the acknowledgements are nonexistent.

What have I learned? I love my field ;-)