The Economics of Education

Other thread got me thinking as to why teachers are paid so little.

 

I have come up with this: Since we have public schools, in which you are put into a school determined by where you live, parents can choose school either school for free or very expensive private school.

 

Since the parents have no choices (due to districts) to pick the best school for their kids, the respective public school districts have very little incentive to pay teachers well, which would in turn attract more highly qualified teachers.

 

What I am saying is that, I believe, that the reason schools don't pay teachers much is because the schools aren't in competition with each other. There is no reason to be the best school in your area. It is like having a monopoly on the "education industry" in their certain area.

 

This is a reason that I believe that it seems that wherever there are more schools in one area, the higher quality of education in that area.

I know that parts of my post are obvious but it makes sense as to why teachers are paid little.

 

There are also holes- it doesn't explain why private school teachers are still paid little even though a lot of them provide phenomenal education (as much as a lot of public school people would hate to admit).

 

I am just trying to find a reason why we have never put much monetary value on the teaching profession. This is an economic answer- lack of competition. I am very undereducated in the area of education so I look forward to comments by other people who are more involved.

I know that parts of my post are obvious but it makes sense as to why teachers are paid little.

 

There are also holes- it doesn't explain why private school teachers are still paid little even though a lot of them provide phenomenal education (as much as a lot of public school people would hate to admit).

 

I am just trying to find a reason why we have never put much monetary value on the teaching profession. This is an economic answer- lack of competition. I am very undereducated in the area of education so I look forward to comments by other people who are more involved.

I disagree with your premise. Teachers are not underpaid, as a group. If teachers were truly underpaid, we would see a very high turnover rate in the profession. Teaching is like any other profession. Incompetent, lazy teachers are overpaid and outstanding teachers are grossly underpaid. The rest of them fall in between those extremes and are paid commensurate with their effort and the quality of their work.

I'd say considering the level of education a teacher must obtain (Masters), they are underpaid, compared to their peers in the business world.

I disagree with your premise. Teachers are not underpaid, as a group. If teachers were truly underpaid, we would see a very high turnover rate in the profession. .

 

The pay keeps many qualified people from pursuing the job which CAN effect the quality of education. CCH's theory is correct IMO.

I'd say considering the level of education a teacher must obtain (Masters), they are underpaid, compared to their peers in the business world.

 

"Underpaid" is so subjective and how do you compare one profession to one that is completely unrelated?

 

I assume they're underpaid simply due to their potential impact on society.

 

Again, the bigger issue to me is how the pay precludes many from even considering the profession.

BTW, the above is all appropriate discussion unless we're talking about Johnson Central's football coach.

If teachers were truly underpaid, we would see a very high turnover rate in the profession.

 

You have no idea what you are talking about. Nationaly 3/4 of new teachers are out of the profession before they teach 5 years. It costs billions annually to train new teachers because of the turnover.

You have no idea what you are talking about. Nationaly 3/4 of new teachers are out of the profession before they teach 5 years. It costs billions annually to train new teachers because of the turnover.

 

...which is why service groups like Teach For America have been counted on by many districts.

I know that parts of my post are obvious but it makes sense as to why teachers are paid little.

 

There are also holes- it doesn't explain why private school teachers are still paid little even though a lot of them provide phenomenal education (as much as a lot of public school people would hate to admit).

 

I am just trying to find a reason why we have never put much monetary value on the teaching profession. This is an economic answer- lack of competition. I am very undereducated in the area of education so I look forward to comments by other people who are more involved.

 

I don't have a problem admiting this, as long as the private sector understands that a quality education can be found in some public schools.

 

As far as underpayment, I am in this camp, I have just completed 188 hrs of college credit. Most people would call this person with this many hours a Dr.

However, my salary even when I get up in years will never pass 65,000, whereas, a person with this many hrs, would, easliy make 85,000+.

 

Then everyday people will always say that there is something wrong with my profession, we are not educating as we should, or China is doing better, therefore, we are failing (this is not the true picture though).

 

Even though there are these complaints, instead of trying to fund and add resources, we take away, even the megger bonus a teacher has each year( not logical).

 

So, the market, as so kindly put, does not pay for such highly qualified teachers.

 

Your question of "why" has been asked by KEA for many years and will continue to be asked?

 

It seems that you are on belief that a teacher should get paid by the results of his or her work, I am fine with that, but how are you going to measure that?

We know all children learn differently and at different paces. So children are pushed by their parents to succeed, while others, are pushed to just show up. Each school system is different, each student is different, so whatever the measurement tool that you have, it will still not be accurate. For what one teacher faces in Jefferson Co. Another teacher is facing other issues in McCreary Co. It is to broad of a stroke.

 

Are each of the teachers in the above doing their best... more than likely, are the getting "results" possible, if the teacher in Jefferson Co. got her test scores back that was over 100 on the CATS index, everyone, would pat that teacher on the back. However, in McCreary Co. a teacher got a student to care about learning, and understand character development, and that child went on to college, but her CATS scores were in the 70's. What would happen to that teacher?

 

Who succeeded?

 

Some issues are more than black and white, teachers everywhere fight battles of proverty, uneducated, political correctness, all are underpaid!!!:cry:

Other thread got me thinking as to why teachers are paid so little.

 

I have come up with this: Since we have public schools, in which you are put into a school determined by where you live, parents can choose school either school for free or very expensive private school.

 

Since the parents have no choices (due to districts) to pick the best school for their kids, the respective public school districts have very little incentive to pay teachers well, which would in turn attract more highly qualified teachers.

 

What I am saying is that, I believe, that the reason schools don't pay teachers much is because the schools aren't in competition with each other. There is no reason to be the best school in your area. It is like having a monopoly on the "education industry" in their certain area.

 

This is a reason that I believe that it seems that wherever there are more schools in one area, the higher quality of education in that area.

 

One problem with you premise is the idea that there is no competition for the school systems. I don't know about Ky but in VA it is as simple as being accredited and non-accredited by the state. If your school falls behind to far in accredidation you can loose control of your school system and/or money from the state.

 

No the truth as to why they aren't paid more consistently is that in VA each school board sets scale by their own tax base. What I've found is that many people do not want to be taxed more for schools if their kids aren't in them anymore. So they raise caine with supervisors who are afraid to lose votes if they increase taxes to pay for better schools.

"Underpaid" is so subjective and how do you compare one profession to one that is completely unrelated?

 

I assume they're underpaid simply due to their potential impact on society.

 

Again, the bigger issue to me is how the pay precludes many from even considering the profession.

 

Sort of what I am saying. If I am going to spend the time and money for a masters, and my main goal is earning power, then a Masters in Education is way down on the list.

You have no idea what you are talking about. Nationaly 3/4 of new teachers are out of the profession before they teach 5 years. It costs billions annually to train new teachers because of the turnover.

How many teaching jobs go unfilled? For those that do go unfilled, why does the NEA oppose allowing public school systems from paying more for those hard to fill slots?

 

In some industries, the turnover rate is 100% or more. Please provide some evidence to support your claim that 3/4 of teachers leave the profession within five years (I am skeptical but willing to be convinced). Regardless, the fact remains that schools have no trouble filling available positions with qualified applicants in most areas.

 

I acknowledge that some schools do experience difficulty finding qualified applicants in some areas like special education, math, and science, and I believe that schools should be able to pay teachers in those areas more in order to hire and retain qualified people. Unfortunately, the NEA disagrees and believes in basing pay on factors other than merit or supply and demand.

Teachers are paid according to the educational budget of that state or school district and the only way to change this is to increase taxes – something that has been proven to greatly lessen a politician’s career life.

 

Money is obviously not the reason anyone decides to be a teacher. Every education major knows roughly how much he or she will make before actually going into the field. They know this and still chose this honorable profession because they have been given a gift to be educators. That being said, it is fair to assume that the low pay scale does not attract as many candidates as it would otherwise. And, obviously, a larger candidate field would only increase the quality of people that actually obtain jobs in that profession.

I believe both teachers and social workers are underpaid, especially considering the education requirements. Teachers do enjoy benefits rarely found else where: Tenure and early retirement.