Low Pay
Over the next few days I'll be examining the various reasons why people leave the teaching profession. The first, and most important, reason is one of economic incentives.
For a college graduate, K-12 education offers one of the lowest starting salaries and one of the lowest ceilings for potential future earnings. The best lawyer in Mississippi can expect to make millions of dollars a year. Same with the best doctor, the best engineer, the best real estate agent, and the best investment banker. The worst in each of these professions will not be able to make a living and forced out of the profession altogether.
The best teacher in the state of Mississippi, with a PhD and Board Certified, can expect to top out around $65,000. The worst teacher in Mississippi, with a bachelors and 20 years, will earn around $55,000. Low pay is the greatest problem in attracting talented young people to the profession of teaching. Low ceiling is the greatest problem with keeping good teachers in the classroom. Many talented teachers leave the classroom to go into consulting, non-profits, higher ed, textbook writing, motivational speaking, and program management. Or they leave the education field altogether (those who leave to become princicpals, supts, etc will be the topic of a future post).
When it comes to education, you get what you pay for. Low salaries and low standards for teacher licensure mean an abundance of low-quality teachers. Until the issue of teacher pay is solved, nothing else will change. By solved, I don’t mean a $5,000 bonus for teaching in a critical-needs area, or assistance with housing. I mean a fundamental shift in teacher pay. This would encompass four things:
1) Raising taxes.
2) An equal distribution of tax revenue to school districts. No longer should property taxes be the basis for a districts annual budget. This only leads to poor school districts being punished and rich ones rewarded because of land value. All property tax should be collected, nationwide, and then redistributed equally. This leads to my next point...
3) Nationalizing public education with a national curriculum and national standards. Education is far too important to leave up to the individual states and school districts.
4) Doubling the starting salary of teachers nationwide to $60,000 a year (expensive urban areas would start at $80,000 but no starting teacher would make less than $60,000). $20,000 additional for teaching in a “critical-needs” district. The top end of the pay scale increases to $200,000. This would end the nationwide teacher shortage, create competition for all positions, and offer a strong incentive for good teachers to go to high-need schools.
Further Reading:
My Groups
-
Mississippi Teacher Corps Updated: 7 days ago
-
Peace Corps Updated: Nov 28, 2007
-
Mississippi Teacher Corps (host) Updated: May 15, 2007
Comments
I think that the incentives would work, but there are better ways to fund something like that. I think that there is enough money put into other projects that could fund a good part of these incentive packages, such as welfare. If we were to raise the minimum standards to receive welfare, the government could save a lot of money right there and redirect it into education. However, either your ideas or mine are nothing more than a Band-Aid put on top of the real problem. Schools should not be expected to be a substitute for parental involvement or home training.
This is a good idea posed by a fellow MTC'er. I would propose almost a total elimination of welfare and let people figure out how the world works on their own. Is it radical? Yes. Is it feasible? No. I get that. But the idea is that it is going to take some incredibly radical and fundamental changes to alleviate the problem. I purposely use the word alleviate because there is no cure for poverty. There will always be a lower class. That won't change.
I would disagree because it sounds like socialism. A plan like that puts us going down a slippery slope with a little too much government involvement.
Sort of like Darfur or Rwanda or Iraq. People in those countries are certainly figuring out how the world works...
Something tells me a welfare check is not going to fix that situation...
This is true it in a capitalistic society. But then capitalism is an economic theory and should not be applied to government and society. When it is you get what we have in America, incredible disparities of wealth and poverty...
What are we to do then? Are government, society, and economics not all intertwined? How do we close the gap between wealth and poverty without negatively impacting the middle, especially when so many in poverty seem willing to allow the government to subsidize their income without making the effort to alleviate the burden of the government?