HS teacher-$70K for 9 months of work

[Eugene]

[quote=kev374]
Considering Software Engineers with 10 years experience are being offered $70k salaries these days I think paying that to a high school teachers is ludicrous, it should be more like $30k considering it is only for 9 months of work.[/quote]

70k for a software engineer with 10 years of experience is well below average. Should be closer to 90-100.

70k for a teacher on a 9-month schedule is only possible if he/she has a master’s degree and 10-15 years of experience. A teacher with only a bachelor and 5 years would make closer to 45k.

It is always possible to find some outliers.

[Eugene]

[quote]So true about market driven… Best case in point… Nurses. 2 Years and they come out making more than some PhDs…[/quote]

More like 4. And that’s not including time on the waitlist to get into nursing, which is, in most California community colleges, at least three years from the moment you fullfill all prerequisites (at a minimum, a lot of chemistry and biology, some places require an associate degree). Palomar College admits 30 students/semester, on average, and has 350 people on the waitlist.

If you don’t want to wait, you can go to a for-profit college like Kaplan and graduate with $50,000 of student debt.

And then, if you want to make more than 50k/year, it means 12 hour shifts, night shifts, and Saturdays.

[Eugene]

[quote]So true about market driven… Best case in point… Nurses. 2 Years and they come out making more than some PhDs…[/quote]

More like 4. And that’s not including time on the waitlist to get into nursing, which is, in most California community colleges, at least three years from the moment you fullfill all prerequisites (at a minimum, a lot of chemistry and biology, some places require an associate degree). Palomar College admits 30 students/semester, on average, and has 350 people on the waitlist.

If you don’t want to wait, you can go to a for-profit college like Kaplan and graduate with $50,000 of student debt.

And then, if you want to make more than 50k/year, it means 12 hour shifts, night shifts, and Saturdays.

[Eugene]

[quote]So true about market driven… Best case in point… Nurses. 2 Years and they come out making more than some PhDs…[/quote]

More like 4. And that’s not including time on the waitlist to get into nursing, which is, in most California community colleges, at least three years from the moment you fullfill all prerequisites (at a minimum, a lot of chemistry and biology, some places require an associate degree). Palomar College admits 30 students/semester, on average, and has 350 people on the waitlist.

If you don’t want to wait, you can go to a for-profit college like Kaplan and graduate with $50,000 of student debt.

And then, if you want to make more than 50k/year, it means 12 hour shifts, night shifts, and Saturdays.

[Eugene]

[quote]So true about market driven… Best case in point… Nurses. 2 Years and they come out making more than some PhDs…[/quote]

More like 4. And that’s not including time on the waitlist to get into nursing, which is, in most California community colleges, at least three years from the moment you fullfill all prerequisites (at a minimum, a lot of chemistry and biology, some places require an associate degree). Palomar College admits 30 students/semester, on average, and has 350 people on the waitlist.

If you don’t want to wait, you can go to a for-profit college like Kaplan and graduate with $50,000 of student debt.

And then, if you want to make more than 50k/year, it means 12 hour shifts, night shifts, and Saturdays.

[Eugene]

[quote]So true about market driven… Best case in point… Nurses. 2 Years and they come out making more than some PhDs…[/quote]

More like 4. And that’s not including time on the waitlist to get into nursing, which is, in most California community colleges, at least three years from the moment you fullfill all prerequisites (at a minimum, a lot of chemistry and biology, some places require an associate degree). Palomar College admits 30 students/semester, on average, and has 350 people on the waitlist.

If you don’t want to wait, you can go to a for-profit college like Kaplan and graduate with $50,000 of student debt.

And then, if you want to make more than 50k/year, it means 12 hour shifts, night shifts, and Saturdays.

[DWCAP]

This conversation cracks me up. Can anyone tell me a well paying job that has no stress? I mean seriously, I want to know 1 well paying job, that has actual academic requirments (Ie post HS), benifits, and large amounts of personal self fufillment that doesnt have any stress or repeated frustrating moments? Just one job catagory. Cause if you can find one, I will apply tomorrow.

I had great teachers who were awsome. I had shitty teachers who were HORRIBLE. For some reason the people who seem to always be defending teachers always are refering to the first group, and in the process protecting and enabling the second. For some reason the people who are always attacking the teaching profession compensation (I am including the bennies, how many engineers get a tax payer backed pension for life???) seem to focus only on the second group and forget about the first, forgetting the first groups increadable contributions.

The simple fact is that good teachers who inspire the best in students are worth the money. The problem is that we refuse to admit that not all teachers are good, nor worth the money. And as long as the unions and their defenders maintain the status quoe, we cant seperate the good from the bad.

Are shitty engineers who dont do shit and corrupt the program with their indifference and ineptitude diserving of 60-90k a year just cause their job is generally stressful and the person in the office next door is great at their job?
If no, why are teachers worth it?

[DWCAP]

This conversation cracks me up. Can anyone tell me a well paying job that has no stress? I mean seriously, I want to know 1 well paying job, that has actual academic requirments (Ie post HS), benifits, and large amounts of personal self fufillment that doesnt have any stress or repeated frustrating moments? Just one job catagory. Cause if you can find one, I will apply tomorrow.

I had great teachers who were awsome. I had shitty teachers who were HORRIBLE. For some reason the people who seem to always be defending teachers always are refering to the first group, and in the process protecting and enabling the second. For some reason the people who are always attacking the teaching profession compensation (I am including the bennies, how many engineers get a tax payer backed pension for life???) seem to focus only on the second group and forget about the first, forgetting the first groups increadable contributions.

The simple fact is that good teachers who inspire the best in students are worth the money. The problem is that we refuse to admit that not all teachers are good, nor worth the money. And as long as the unions and their defenders maintain the status quoe, we cant seperate the good from the bad.

Are shitty engineers who dont do shit and corrupt the program with their indifference and ineptitude diserving of 60-90k a year just cause their job is generally stressful and the person in the office next door is great at their job?
If no, why are teachers worth it?

[DWCAP]

This conversation cracks me up. Can anyone tell me a well paying job that has no stress? I mean seriously, I want to know 1 well paying job, that has actual academic requirments (Ie post HS), benifits, and large amounts of personal self fufillment that doesnt have any stress or repeated frustrating moments? Just one job catagory. Cause if you can find one, I will apply tomorrow.

I had great teachers who were awsome. I had shitty teachers who were HORRIBLE. For some reason the people who seem to always be defending teachers always are refering to the first group, and in the process protecting and enabling the second. For some reason the people who are always attacking the teaching profession compensation (I am including the bennies, how many engineers get a tax payer backed pension for life???) seem to focus only on the second group and forget about the first, forgetting the first groups increadable contributions.

The simple fact is that good teachers who inspire the best in students are worth the money. The problem is that we refuse to admit that not all teachers are good, nor worth the money. And as long as the unions and their defenders maintain the status quoe, we cant seperate the good from the bad.

Are shitty engineers who dont do shit and corrupt the program with their indifference and ineptitude diserving of 60-90k a year just cause their job is generally stressful and the person in the office next door is great at their job?
If no, why are teachers worth it?

[DWCAP]

This conversation cracks me up. Can anyone tell me a well paying job that has no stress? I mean seriously, I want to know 1 well paying job, that has actual academic requirments (Ie post HS), benifits, and large amounts of personal self fufillment that doesnt have any stress or repeated frustrating moments? Just one job catagory. Cause if you can find one, I will apply tomorrow.

I had great teachers who were awsome. I had shitty teachers who were HORRIBLE. For some reason the people who seem to always be defending teachers always are refering to the first group, and in the process protecting and enabling the second. For some reason the people who are always attacking the teaching profession compensation (I am including the bennies, how many engineers get a tax payer backed pension for life???) seem to focus only on the second group and forget about the first, forgetting the first groups increadable contributions.

The simple fact is that good teachers who inspire the best in students are worth the money. The problem is that we refuse to admit that not all teachers are good, nor worth the money. And as long as the unions and their defenders maintain the status quoe, we cant seperate the good from the bad.

Are shitty engineers who dont do shit and corrupt the program with their indifference and ineptitude diserving of 60-90k a year just cause their job is generally stressful and the person in the office next door is great at their job?
If no, why are teachers worth it?

[DWCAP]

This conversation cracks me up. Can anyone tell me a well paying job that has no stress? I mean seriously, I want to know 1 well paying job, that has actual academic requirments (Ie post HS), benifits, and large amounts of personal self fufillment that doesnt have any stress or repeated frustrating moments? Just one job catagory. Cause if you can find one, I will apply tomorrow.

I had great teachers who were awsome. I had shitty teachers who were HORRIBLE. For some reason the people who seem to always be defending teachers always are refering to the first group, and in the process protecting and enabling the second. For some reason the people who are always attacking the teaching profession compensation (I am including the bennies, how many engineers get a tax payer backed pension for life???) seem to focus only on the second group and forget about the first, forgetting the first groups increadable contributions.

The simple fact is that good teachers who inspire the best in students are worth the money. The problem is that we refuse to admit that not all teachers are good, nor worth the money. And as long as the unions and their defenders maintain the status quoe, we cant seperate the good from the bad.

Are shitty engineers who dont do shit and corrupt the program with their indifference and ineptitude diserving of 60-90k a year just cause their job is generally stressful and the person in the office next door is great at their job?
If no, why are teachers worth it?

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=CDMA ENG]
Sorry man… But only 50 percent of all people that enter an engineering program make it out… I dare say the drop out ratio for teaching isn’t the same and if it is its due to lack of commitment and not subject matter.

You cant sit there and tell me one is just as difficult academically (which I probably just misspelled) as the other. Plus… Many engineers study there subject matter constantly… They are in “training” everyday… I read and re-read all the time. I don’t have to have formalized training the training comes from working with very unique problems everyday.

I have a lot of respect for teachers but you still can’t say its the same difficulty academically.

Also I dont know if you were referring to me but I did not say that teachers work 6 hours a day. I stated that the ones I knew worked 40 plus.

CE[/quote]
That you think it is a lot easier academically is two me evidence of ignorance on your part.

In all fairness, “academic” can mean different things in these to occupations.

I have known a lot of engineers and a lot of teachers. Both require a fairly deep understanding of the subject matter. However, most people think that the subject matter is the material being taught.
Its not.
The subject matter for a teacher is the student.
The hardest subjects are the ones in the poorest neighborhoods who don’t really see the purpose in education. Usually the hardest work here is delegated to the lowest-paid workers.

Also, I challenge you to present stats comparing how many people enter engineering programs and are in that profession 10 years later and compare that with teachers.

A whole lot of teachers drop out their first year to become engineers (because they find it easier). I imagine the reverse is true.

Finally, considering most teachers I know work more than 60 hrs per week, I think the argument that they somehow don’t work as hard is kind of dumb.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=CDMA ENG]
Sorry man… But only 50 percent of all people that enter an engineering program make it out… I dare say the drop out ratio for teaching isn’t the same and if it is its due to lack of commitment and not subject matter.

You cant sit there and tell me one is just as difficult academically (which I probably just misspelled) as the other. Plus… Many engineers study there subject matter constantly… They are in “training” everyday… I read and re-read all the time. I don’t have to have formalized training the training comes from working with very unique problems everyday.

I have a lot of respect for teachers but you still can’t say its the same difficulty academically.

Also I dont know if you were referring to me but I did not say that teachers work 6 hours a day. I stated that the ones I knew worked 40 plus.

CE[/quote]
That you think it is a lot easier academically is two me evidence of ignorance on your part.

In all fairness, “academic” can mean different things in these to occupations.

I have known a lot of engineers and a lot of teachers. Both require a fairly deep understanding of the subject matter. However, most people think that the subject matter is the material being taught.
Its not.
The subject matter for a teacher is the student.
The hardest subjects are the ones in the poorest neighborhoods who don’t really see the purpose in education. Usually the hardest work here is delegated to the lowest-paid workers.

Also, I challenge you to present stats comparing how many people enter engineering programs and are in that profession 10 years later and compare that with teachers.

A whole lot of teachers drop out their first year to become engineers (because they find it easier). I imagine the reverse is true.

Finally, considering most teachers I know work more than 60 hrs per week, I think the argument that they somehow don’t work as hard is kind of dumb.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=CDMA ENG]
Sorry man… But only 50 percent of all people that enter an engineering program make it out… I dare say the drop out ratio for teaching isn’t the same and if it is its due to lack of commitment and not subject matter.

You cant sit there and tell me one is just as difficult academically (which I probably just misspelled) as the other. Plus… Many engineers study there subject matter constantly… They are in “training” everyday… I read and re-read all the time. I don’t have to have formalized training the training comes from working with very unique problems everyday.

I have a lot of respect for teachers but you still can’t say its the same difficulty academically.

Also I dont know if you were referring to me but I did not say that teachers work 6 hours a day. I stated that the ones I knew worked 40 plus.

CE[/quote]
That you think it is a lot easier academically is two me evidence of ignorance on your part.

In all fairness, “academic” can mean different things in these to occupations.

I have known a lot of engineers and a lot of teachers. Both require a fairly deep understanding of the subject matter. However, most people think that the subject matter is the material being taught.
Its not.
The subject matter for a teacher is the student.
The hardest subjects are the ones in the poorest neighborhoods who don’t really see the purpose in education. Usually the hardest work here is delegated to the lowest-paid workers.

Also, I challenge you to present stats comparing how many people enter engineering programs and are in that profession 10 years later and compare that with teachers.

A whole lot of teachers drop out their first year to become engineers (because they find it easier). I imagine the reverse is true.

Finally, considering most teachers I know work more than 60 hrs per week, I think the argument that they somehow don’t work as hard is kind of dumb.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=CDMA ENG]
Sorry man… But only 50 percent of all people that enter an engineering program make it out… I dare say the drop out ratio for teaching isn’t the same and if it is its due to lack of commitment and not subject matter.

You cant sit there and tell me one is just as difficult academically (which I probably just misspelled) as the other. Plus… Many engineers study there subject matter constantly… They are in “training” everyday… I read and re-read all the time. I don’t have to have formalized training the training comes from working with very unique problems everyday.

I have a lot of respect for teachers but you still can’t say its the same difficulty academically.

Also I dont know if you were referring to me but I did not say that teachers work 6 hours a day. I stated that the ones I knew worked 40 plus.

CE[/quote]
That you think it is a lot easier academically is two me evidence of ignorance on your part.

In all fairness, “academic” can mean different things in these to occupations.

I have known a lot of engineers and a lot of teachers. Both require a fairly deep understanding of the subject matter. However, most people think that the subject matter is the material being taught.
Its not.
The subject matter for a teacher is the student.
The hardest subjects are the ones in the poorest neighborhoods who don’t really see the purpose in education. Usually the hardest work here is delegated to the lowest-paid workers.

Also, I challenge you to present stats comparing how many people enter engineering programs and are in that profession 10 years later and compare that with teachers.

A whole lot of teachers drop out their first year to become engineers (because they find it easier). I imagine the reverse is true.

Finally, considering most teachers I know work more than 60 hrs per week, I think the argument that they somehow don’t work as hard is kind of dumb.

[Author]

Posts