Now in my 23rd year as a substitute teacher, I often hear similar complaints during lunch breaks. Two of my children, hers, have advanced degrees in teaching. A person would have nothing to do with it. The other, like the teacher in Mr. Pink’s essay, is struggling financially.
I need a solution. Those who can solve the problem will continue to work around it. Any treatment must include a salary increase. I can’t buy food this year with last year’s salary. But who would want to pay for someone else’s raise?
Talent is fleeing the classroom, and their quiet exits are having debilitating and long-term consequences. Today’s classroom teachers need leaders to help solve this nationally stagnant pay landscape. Otherwise, top talent will move on to higher-paying careers. Children are taught by inexperienced and unmotivated teachers.
Leaving the next generation to solve the problem will be a disaster with no short-term solution.
John Hebbe, fairfax station
Daniel Pink should consider whether the concept of “teacher quality” that exists in the offices and classrooms of American teacher training programs should be added to the list of discarded theories.
The concept of teacher quality cannot be measured scientifically. The presumed but immeasurable differences in teaching ability among teachers have not produced similar useful knowledge and understanding in K-12 pedagogy practice.
The idea that different levels of teacher quality are causally related to different levels of student learning from kindergarten through high school is widely accepted both in academic and educational circles and in society at large. Masu. Yet that “faith” has produced no improvement in academic outcomes during nearly 60 years of relentless legislative mandates to “reform” schools. Politically, K-12 teachers are culpable. The reason is the universal fact that you cannot teach all students as effectively as you can the best students. Student quality, as measured by psychological intelligence tools, is very important in student academic performance. The quality of a teacher is not measured by anything, but it hardly matters.
When you try to identify (and measure) the differences that actually impact K-12 learning, you’re much more likely to find differences between students than between teachers. The variation in teachers’ intelligence, professional training, motivation, and oral communication skills is very narrow. Barriers to entry for teachers are numerous and substantial. Conversely, there is almost no limit to a student’s intelligence, pre-school learning, motivation, and oral communication skills. There are basically no barriers to entry for students. Considering quality comparisons among trained teachers serves no practical purpose in establishing and implementing policies governing K-12 education.
Nevertheless, paying teachers $100,000 a year seems like a good idea.
Daniel Pink called the current school year length a relic and offered year-round school in exchange for a higher, more competitive annual salary of $100,000 than he proposed. .
If we decide to abolish summer vacation, I would like to put another controversial proposal on the table. Why not add an extra year to your current K-12 experience before being awarded your high school diploma? No, it’s not the first year of college, but it’s a great way to help students prepare for college, other forms of education, and more. It is an extension of the core learning experiences that must be experienced before proceeding to post-secondary education and, ultimately, the workplace. The tsunami of knowledge and skill building that the United States and the rest of the world have experienced over the past half-century requires more formal time and attention than ever before.
Throw away the relics and defeat the dinosaurs at the same time.
Frank Bartnett, springfield
Daniel Pink asked, “Why don’t we pay teachers $100,000 a year?” Answer: Because you don’t have to. When was the last time Mr. Pink paid $100,000 for something he could get for $66,397 (the average salary for a teacher, according to his article)?
That is, until now there was no need to do so. If there is a teacher shortage, yes, the pay probably has to be higher, maybe $75,000, maybe $100,000, maybe even more, but that decision is based on morals, aesthetics, It will be based on economics, not philosophy. We pay as much as we need, not an amount that depends on our subjective view of whether a teacher “deserves” more than an actuary (whose average salary, according to Pink, is $113,990). Pay what it takes to get great teachers.
Keith E. Smith, silver spring