Milwaukee Public Schools

[Pakuni]

I don't think summer vacation should be "eliminated," but I think the entire schedule needs to be looked at.  Right now, kids go to school about 36 weeks a year.  Bump that up to 40...shorten summer vacation to six weeks... and spread the rest around with a fall break, a winter break and a spring break.  Having kids getting off school at the end of June, and going back around mid-August gives them enough time to enjoy the summer.

Sounds easy, unless you're a single parent or couple who can't afford to have one parent stay home. Finding affordable child care for a long summer break is hard enough when kids home for college and various summer camps are available. Finding it for lengthier fall, winter and spring breaks will prove a challenge for many.

Also, be prepared to pay higher taxes. More school days = higher school employee salaries, higher utility costs - especially for AC in summer months - higher maintenance costs, higher transportation costs, more free meals, etc.).

I don't disagree with the concept of a longer school year - and as the spouse of an educator, I'd be happy to have the additional family income - but it's a far more complex and costly proposal than most proponents let on.

[Ari Gold]

Good idea, but that also can cause bureaucratic nightmares. New Jersey has one of the best public school systems in the country, but facing massive budget shortfalls. Why? Cause instead of having, say, 50 superintendents, they have nearly 500. While they have a more targeted focus and close involvement, the state has to pay nearly 500 people superintendents level salaries. Plus, asst superintendents, and so on.

There are a lot of innovative ways we can improve education in America. Lots of plans, roadmaps, trainings, etc. But ANY solution that does not address the low value our society places on teacher careers will continue to fall short.

If MPS put a value on Teachers they wouldn't have laid off a teacher of the year because she didst have seniority and kept other teachers that have been a part of the failing district

[mu_hilltopper]

If MPS put a value on Teachers they wouldn't have laid off a teacher of the year because she didst have seniority and kept other teachers that have been a part of the failing district

Don't blame MPS for union rules.  In a post-Act 10 world (when their union contract runs out next year) .. laying off the Teacher of the Year won't happen.

..ANY solution that does not address the low value our society places on teacher careers will continue to fall short.

Disagree with the premise.  Our society places a high value on teachers and by extension, their careers.  There's a vocal minority of severely anti-union/teacher folks who are disparaging, spawning indignant teachers (or observers) who say things like you just did.   

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

There's a vocal minority of severely anti-union/teacher folks who are disparaging, spawning indignant teachers (or observers) who say things like you just did.   

Bingo. This is the problem with a lot of political hot-button issues. People become further entrenched and farther apart, when in reality their views probably aren't that different to begin with.

If you strip away all of the rhetoric, most people could get on board with a revised MPS/Union plan. But, when the extreme voices are heard, it polarizes the groups and expands the divide.

Part of the problem is that our elected officials need to be unifiers on these issues.

[Aughnanure]

Disagree with the premise.  Our society places a high value on teachers and by extension, their careers.  There's a vocal minority of severely anti-union/teacher folks who are disparaging, spawning indignant teachers (or observers) who say things like you just did.   

Just cause you say you value teachers doesn't make it true. Tell me how much you think they should get paid and I'll tell you want you value.

[GGGG]

Just cause you say you value teachers doesn't make it true. Tell me how much you think they should get paid and I'll tell you want you value.

Compensation is based on supply and demand.  Simply put, an average teacher can be replaced with an average teacher at very little cost.  Even "good" or "very good" teachers are easier to replace then say....a "good" or "very good" division one college basketball coach.

[Bocephys]

Don't blame MPS for union rules.  In a post-Act 10 world (when their union contract runs out next year) .. laying off the Teacher of the Year won't happen.

Disagree with the premise.  Our society places a high value on teachers and by extension, their careers.  There's a vocal minority of severely anti-union/teacher folks who are disparaging, spawning indignant teachers (or observers) who say things like you just did.   

I think people are more anti-union than anti-teacher.  The problem is just like you said, rewarding length of tenure over skills or process improvements.  That (for the most part) only happens in union jobs.

[Aughnanure]

Compensation is based on supply and demand.  Simply put, an average teacher can be replaced with an average teacher at very little cost.  Even "good" or "very good" teachers are easier to replace then say....a "good" or "very good" division one college basketball coach.

 
This, the idea that we can replace teachers for a low cost proves we don't value them. You get the quality you pay for, and for $50,000/yr you are only going to get that level, and that quality, which attracts those candidates. Teacher careers do not attract the most talented professionals because we don't want them to. When our society learns to value teachers as they do doctors and lawyers, you will see the change. It sickens me when I see and hear people bitching about teachers making 100k plus. That's what they should be making, and what their importance to our society is worth (at the very least).

In Finland, just one in 10 applicants wins a place to train as a teacher. Why? Cause being a teacher is valued. We don't treat teachers like experts (in comparison to, say, doctors), we don't require most of them to hold advanced degrees, and teachers usually have little say  in the policies and standards of their profession.

[4everwarriors]

Tell me which professions we actually value. Other than entertainment and sports, I can't think of many. Certainly it's not doctors, lawyers, accountants or other professionals. They're all a dime/dozen.

[mu_hilltopper]

Just cause you say you value teachers doesn't make it true. Tell me how much you think they should get paid and I'll tell you want you value.

As Sultan suggested .. you can't just base the level of "society's value of teachers" on their compensation level alone.   There's an aspect of supply and demand that cannot be ignored.

That being said, do I think teachers should be paid more for what they do?  Sure.  Speaking as a spouse of a teacher, I'd say new teachers are preposterously underpaid .. mid- and late-career teachers are ~25% underpaid.  I believe there are 15% truly fantastic teachers who are underpaid, and 15% poor teachers who are over-paid (just like any other career.)

[Aughnanure]

Tell me which professions we actually value. Other than entertainment and sports, I can't think of many. Certainly it's not doctors, lawyers, accountants or other professionals. They're all a dime/dozen.

All those you mentioned make significantly more than teachers. Entertainment and sports is in a world of it's own.

[Lennys Tap]

Compensation is based on supply and demand.  Simply put, an average teacher can be replaced with an average teacher at very little cost.  Even "good" or "very good" teachers are easier to replace then say....a "good" or "very good" division one college basketball coach.

A system that includes tenure after 3 years and salaries/benefits negotiated with politicians they contribute millions of dollars to skews the compensation based on supply/demand thing a bit.

[Aughnanure]

As Sultan suggested .. you can't just base the level of "society's value of teachers" on their compensation level alone.   There's an aspect of supply and demand that cannot be ignored.

That being said, do I think teachers should be paid more for what they do?  Sure.  Speaking as a spouse of a teacher, I'd say new teachers are preposterously underpaid .. mid- and late-career teachers are ~25% underpaid.  I believe there are 15% truly fantastic teachers who are underpaid, and 15% poor teachers who are over-paid (just like any other career.)

But it's not about paying current teachers more, it's about attracting future teachers. Who would choose being a teacher over a doctor. Based on pay and respect, doctor. I don't think people assume so openly, as we do with teachers, that somewhere around 10-25% of doctors are "poor."

There's a reason for that - there is a significant barrier and process one has to go through to become a doctors, or a lawyer, etc. It shows that you can't just walk in and become a teacher (looking at you Teach for America), it shows it takes skill, expertise and is very hard to achieve. And the ones that go through it are highly rewarded for the most part. Compensation IS how we value different careers over others.

[CTWarrior]

All government talk about plans to improve and 'No child left behind" is nonsense.  All the talk on this thread about teachers is wasted effort.  Better teachers aren't going to make much difference.  It's not just Milwaukee, its all big city schools.  Here in Connecticut the public schools in Bridgeport (where my wife is a speech pathologist for the very young kids - pre-K) have terrible results.  They have some new, beautiful schools (and are always building more), magnet schools, small class sizes, you name it.  My wife is very dedicated and works with very dedicated teachers who not only teach, but reach into their pocket to buy the kids necessities.  You can come up with whatever plans you want, you can spend however much money you want, you can pay teachers whatever you want, but you can't teach kids who refuse to be taught.  It all starts at home.  My wife regularly gets 3 and 4 year olds for speech therapy who can't talk, because nobody talks to them! 

[Ari Gold]

All those you mentioned make significantly more than teachers. Entertainment and sports is in a world of it's own.

first, whats so bad about 50k a year? thats pretty respectable and with the benefits that teachers can enjoy, they're compensation rises. feel free to look up some of your former teachers: http://www.jsonline.com/watchdog/dataondemand/33534649.html

Furthermore, the market dictates that Doctors, Lawyers and such can get paid what they do IF they are good at their job. to piggyback off what Sultan was saying about supply and demand. Now that Wisconsin has merit based hiring and firing for teachers hopefully the same will be true with teachers. crapty doctors and lawyers get weeded out and are as successful as others. Though its also incredibly detrimental to your argument that you arbitrarily decided that you think teachers DESERVE a 6 figure salary. the most glaring counter argument to that is simply, all those other professions work in June July and August, and don't have extra days off during their year built into their schedule. In a simple comparison, teachers work less days than other professions.


And to speak to Lenny's argument, I think Act 10 took care of those problems.

[Lennys Tap]

But it's not about paying current teachers more, it's about attracting future teachers. Who would choose being a teacher over a doctor. Based on pay and respect, doctor. I don't think people assume so openly, as we do with teachers, that somewhere around 10-25% of doctors are "poor."

There's a reason for that - there is a significant barrier and process one has to go through to become a doctors, or a lawyer, etc. It shows that you can't just walk in and become a teacher (looking at you Teach for America), it shows it takes skill, expertise and is very hard to achieve. And the ones that go through it are highly rewarded for the most part. Compensation IS how we value different careers over others.

Who would choose to be a teacher over a doctor? Well, among other things a) people unqualified or uninterested in going to medical school, b) people who like the idea of 180 work days a year with job security unavailable in the private sector c) people desiring early retirement with very generous pensions and d) very rarely, people who consider teaching a vocation, not a job.

[Bocephys]

Who would choose to be a teacher over a doctor? Well, among other things a) people unqualified or uninterested in going to medical school, b) people who like the idea of 180 work days a year with job security unavailable in the private sector c) people desiring early retirement with very generous pensions and d) very rarely, people who consider teaching a vocation, not a job.

Also people that don't want to do 12 years of schooling and rack up massive debts.

[Pakuni]

A system that includes tenure after 3 years and salaries/benefits negotiated with politicians they contribute millions of dollars to skews the compensation based on supply/demand thing a bit.

With all due respect, teacher unions do not contribute millions of dollars to the people with whom they negotiate salaries and benefits, i.e. local school boards.
The vast majority teacher union donations go to state and federal lawmakers, i.e. the people who make educational policies .... not the people who negotiate salaries.

Not suggesting teachers don't try to influence political dealings in their favor. They do. But what they do is no different than any other business entity who donates to a politician/PAC in hopes of legislation to their benefit. If you're going to rail against teacher union donations, then you should do the same for banking organizations, doctors' groups, lawyers' groups, the US chamber of Commerce, etc.  

As for your later swipes at teachers, you obviously don't know many.

[Aughnanure]

Who would choose to be a teacher over a doctor? Well, among other things a) people unqualified or uninterested in going to medical school, b) people who like the idea of 180 work days a year with job security unavailable in the private sector c) people desiring early retirement with very generous pensions and d) very rarely, people who consider teaching a vocation, not a job.

So, yeah -  a lower level of candidates...cause its easier to get to and pays less. Thanks. By the way, I don't know any teachers who work only 180 days a year. Most summers on the east coast its like 6 weeks off and they start going back for trainings and set-up 2-3 weeks before school even starts. Also, no one is choosing teacher over a doctors for "pensions and retirement." Maybe over other more equally-compensated careers -  but not the ones that pay 4-5 times more every year (at least).

[Aughnanure]

first, whats so bad about 50k a year? thats pretty respectable and with the benefits that teachers can enjoy, they're compensation rises. feel free to look up some of your former teachers: http://www.jsonline.com/watchdog/dataondemand/33534649.html

Furthermore, the market dictates that Doctors, Lawyers and such can get paid what they do IF they are good at their job. to piggyback off what Sultan was saying about supply and demand. Now that Wisconsin has merit based hiring and firing for teachers hopefully the same will be true with teachers. crapty doctors and lawyers get weeded out and are as successful as others. Though its also incredibly detrimental to your argument that you arbitrarily decided that you think teachers DESERVE a 6 figure salary. the most glaring counter argument to that is simply, all those other professions work in June July and August, and don't have extra days off during their year built into their schedule. In a simple comparison, teachers work less days than other professions.


And to speak to Lenny's argument, I think Act 10 took care of those problems.

You think 50k a year is good? I mean it's okay. But I think we should want to pay the people who  influence and teach our future to be paid a little more than "okay." Oh, and their benefits are not always that great, that just been the assumption we've all made for years. Its probably not much different from what the average employee conmpensation at most office jobs. My girlfriend's healthcare coverage is a joke, and she works in DC public schools.

Oh, and no. Teacher's don't get off a full 3 months. But that still doesn't remove the high importance that their job holds. You get what you pay for.

[Spotcheck Billy]

I'd kill for 6 weeks vacation (I get the max of 12 days even though 25 years at same company)

I think teachers' compensation is just 'OK' but it varies by district. I do have several friends that teach and vacation abroad in summer.

[Pakuni]

I'd kill for 6 weeks vacation (I get the max of 12 days even though 25 years at same company)

If you're getting only 12 days after 25 years with the same company, you're working for the wrong company.

[Lennys Tap]

You think 50k a year is good? I mean it's okay. But I think we should want to pay the people who  influence and teach our future to be paid a little more than "okay." Oh, and their benefits are not always that great, that just been the assumption we've all made for years. Its probably not much different from what the average employee conmpensation at most office jobs. My girlfriend's healthcare coverage is a joke, and she works in DC public schools.

Oh, and no. Teacher's don't get off a full 3 months. But that still doesn't remove the high importance that their job holds. You get what you pay for.

So what's your solution, other than just doubling teacher's salaries? You really think that will somehow produce better results? Not as long as tenure after 3 years is part of the picture. I live in Chicago, where teacher's and administrator's salaries/benefits have risen significantly over the last 3 decades while student performance has not.
You're right, though, about teachers not getting a "full 3 months off". When you add summer, winter and spring vacations plus all federal and/or state holidays it's considerably more than that.

[Aughnanure]

If you're getting only 12 days after 25 years with the same company, you're working for the wrong company.

Yeah, what? That's awful.

[Spotcheck Billy]

If you're getting only 12 days after 25 years with the same company, you're working for the wrong company.

no, wrong career choice but there weren't too many options open to me back in the early 80's recession - this is my 2nd career after the factory I was a press operator at went bankrupt in '82

unfortunately there are not too many other choices in my field, basically there is only 1 other employer in the state and I'd be worse off there in other catagories like salary and job security

I should have followed my mother's advice 30 years ago and gone to work at the post office