A teacher walks into her classroom for first period and sees only a single student sitting in a desk. More odd than the empty classroom, the student is someone she doesn't recognize. She's not so...
Exemplary
A teacher walks into her classroom for first period and sees only a single student sitting in a desk. More odd than the empty classroom, the student is someone she doesn't recognize. She's not so much surprised as she is confused, but she dutifully waits for the bell and then she starts the class the way she always does: by calling roll.
"Living Wage?" she asks. There's no answer from the classroom. The one student in attendance just sits there.
"Alright," she says to herself, "Living Wage is absent" and marks it on her roster.
Next student: "Respect from the Community?"
More silence. She marks down another absence.
"Support from Administrators?"
The student speaks up for the first time: "Nah, they're absent too."
"Oh, uh, thank you for your help" she says. "By the way, have you seen Behavioral Support in class recently?"
"They're also absent," the child says.
This pattern continues. The teacher dutifully goes down her roster, calling out the names of Practical Class Sizes, Curricular Materials, Enough Time to Get Work Done, and Safety.
They are, all, of course absent. Downtrodden and clearly realizing that her principled commitment to her daily routine is reaching both absurd and sad levels, she decides to cut the process short and skip the last few names on the list. It's abundantly clear to her: they are not here.
She looks at the student sitting in the desk. "Alright, what's your name?"
The student, with a bit of hesitation in his voice, says "I don't want to be rude or anything Miss, but we have met before."
She's genuinely taken aback. "We have?"
"Yeah, my name is The Profound Sense of Satisfaction You Get When You Help Out Other People".
The teacher takes a deep breath. She did know him. She just hadn't seen him in so long that she genuinely forgot what he looked like.
"I'm so sorry, Satisfaction! Of course I know you. It's just... been a while for me. You haven't been around much."
"Yeah, sorry about that" he apologizes. "I came here today to let you know that I think what you're doing is really important. I'm going to try to show up more often, since I know it matters to you that I'm here in your class."
"Seriously?" she asks. She is near tears.
"LOL, NOPE!" he yells with glee. "Nobody else is here so why I should I stick around? I'm gone, and I'm not coming back. Peace!"
With one swift motion, he's up and out the door. The teacher is left entirely alone in her empty classroom.
She logs into her school account and just sits there, silently.
I do a bit of private tutoring. My background is in engineering, and I'm currently in a PhD program. I have extensive experience as an educator, been tutoring students for over 20 years. I even...
Exemplary
I do a bit of private tutoring. My background is in engineering, and I'm currently in a PhD program. I have extensive experience as an educator, been tutoring students for over 20 years. I even have a Masters degree in education. I do some private tutoring and have posted some ads at times on community social media spaces. I don't post such ads often, no more than once or twice a year. However, when I do offer my services, I do so making clear I'm looking for private tutoring.
Private tutoring isn't cheap. I typically charge $70-75 for a one hour tutoring session, and many tutors certainly go higher. $75 sounds like a lot, but that's the cost for me to come to your house for a single hour. If I was looking to work such hours, and someone wanted to hire me full time as a tutor, I would charge far less than $75 per hour. That charge includes pay for travel time, vehicle costs, and all the unpaid work I do coordinating with students and their parents. I have to charge $70-75 for a session just to make $20-25 when all the costs are considered. That's simply the nature of hiring someone to come work on an ad-hoc basis in your home. A plumber will charge you $100, at a bare absolute unheard of minimum, even if all they do is come to your house and turn a single nut. Traveling is expensive, and if you're hiring short term work, you need to be able to pay more. This is also all 1099 work and of course doesn't pay payroll taxes, insurance, etc. Salary workers can ignore the time and cost of a commute; private contractors can't.
So in short, my usual rate is about $70-75 for an hour of teaching, and that rate is very reasonable.
A few months ago, when I posted my tutoring info, I was contacted by the principal of a local private school. They wanted to see if I was interested in serving as a substitute. They were offering.....$18 an hour. This is barely above minimum wage in my area. I can literally make more working at McDonalds. This is their standard substitute rate, and they do not budge on it. This principal seriously expected someone with years of education and technical experience, two Masters degrees, and most of a PhD to be willing to work for $18 per hour. And this of course isn't some full-time job. They're not offering $18 an hour at 40 hours a week with retirement and health insurance on top. They're offering $18 per hour for short-term temporary work with no benefits whatsoever. And they're looking for substitutes, which means they want to be able to call you at 7 in the morning and expect you to drop everything and come in for a day or half day. For $18 an hour.
Now, I probably should have just not responded. But I was so insulted by it that my feelings got the best of me. I replied, and I laid it all out. I laid out my experience, credentials, my usual rate, and why I charge it. And then, like a good educator, I actually did the math.
The school in question is not some poor inner city school. It's a private school that charges over $14,000 a year in tuition. So let's run through the numbers. I know that scholarships to such schools are a thing, so let's imagine that the average student pays half that price once financial aid is considered. So let's imagine the average student pays $7k in annual tuition. Let's assume a low number of students per class at 20. A class of 20 brings in $140k a year in tuition, or, if we assume a 180 day school year, $777 per instruction day. In a class of 20 students, those twenty students will pay perhaps a combined $777 for their tuition.
Now, I'm not an unreasonable person. I understand not all that money can go to the instructor. If I were standing in a school, I would say, "I understand all this <gestures vaguely in all directions> needs to be paid for." There's far more to a school than just the instructor's pay; facilities, support staff, insurance, etc.
So what is fair? Personally, I don't at all think a pay rate of 1/3 of the charged tuition is unreasonable. Shouldn't the people actually teaching the classes, the central purpose of the school, upon which all the other stuff is mere accessory, be paid a measly third of the tuition charged? That still allows the school to burn 2/3 of resources in things outside of instruction. Shouldn't a mere third of what students pay actually go towards their instruction? (Especially when this is a nonprofit and the school doesn't pay income or property tax.)
At this 1/3 pay level, that would come to about $260 per instruction day, or, if assuming 7 hours of instruction time, $37 per hour, or over twice that they were offering. I would be willing to charge less per hour for a larger block of substitute work than I would for a single one hour session, so I would be willing to do it for something like $40 per hour. And really, that's not out of line with teacher salaries. At 2000 hours per year, $40 per hour comes to an annual rate of $80,000. And while most teachers don't make that much, when you factor in benefits, it's around that range. And really, you should expect to pay MORE for short-term staff than you do for permanent employees, buying in bulk and all that.
Anyway, I laid all this out in a long email. I was actually quite interested in potentially doing this. Popping into a science or math classroom and serving as a substitute doesn't sound that bad. I love working with kids. But this school made that completely impossible through their greed. I normally don't contact employers out of the blue and tell them they're not paying enough. But if someone contacts me unsolicited, I don't mind laying it out there. Honestly, it's pretty rude to contact someone up and make such a comically insulting offer. I laid all this out, in a professional and calm manner, explaining what my expected rate would be. Unsurprisingly, they never responded.
So yeah, I have no doubt that schools may be having trouble finding substitutes. And I have zero sympathy for them. It's like every high school is run by administrators who never finished 8th grade and don't know how to do basic math. Hell, they probably never finished 3rd grade; at least 3rd graders can do multiplication. The sense I get is that schools simply deeply, deeply disrespect substitute teachers. They view them as volunteers undeserving of pay or respect. Their idea of a substitute is a retired teacher who already has a comfortable retirement taken care of and wants to occasionally substitute as a means of getting out of the house.
Substituting doesn't have to be this way. The stereotype of a substitute is a complete professional wash-out who cares nothing for students and is a terrible educator. Think of how a substitute would be portrayed on The Simpsons, someone who shows up hung over, wreaking of booze, who starts a video for a class before passing out, a glorified babysitter. That's the stereotype of a substitute. In a different world, being a substitute would actually be a highly respected career. In fact, the best teachers might be substitutes.
Imagine if we expected substitutes not merely to serve as babysitters, but actually offer instruction equal or even superior to any regular instructor. Imagine the type of skills one would need in order to be able to effectively teach an incredible variety of classes, and actually manage to teach them well. Imagine if a substitute could actually teach calculus, physics, chemistry, biology, and even language arts and arts like visual and performing arts. Imagine someone so erudite they could teach a third grade class on Monday, 8th grade language arts on Tuesday, AP Physics C on Wednesday, 6th grade human growth and development on Thursday, and drama class on Friday. Oh, and for good measure, high school shop class the next week. And imagine they could actually excel at all of these roles. This platonic ideal substitute is a genuine polymath who can weave in and out of a dozen disciplines and actually provide high quality instruction in any of them. (I'm certainly nowhere near this god-tier level, but I think this would be the ideal vision of a substitute if we actually respected it as its own profession.) Someone with such a rich background they can jump into virtually any K12 classroom and offer high-quality instruction. When you're calling in a substitute, you're not calling in some washed-out drunk. You're calling Mary Poppins, a damn miracle worker. And Mary Poppins does not come cheap.
When I have to call out, I know the work assigned won't get done by 90% of the class because most substitutes in my area are not great. But they're not great because they get paid like $120 a day...
When I have to call out, I know the work assigned won't get done by 90% of the class because most substitutes in my area are not great. But they're not great because they get paid like $120 a day with no benefits so no one of quality is going to take that job except retired teachers who just want something to do.
Honestly, until they do something about the rules around teaching, where the admin exists to just do whatever whims the insane parents come up with, I don't think you could pay me enough. Pay...
Honestly, until they do something about the rules around teaching, where the admin exists to just do whatever whims the insane parents come up with, I don't think you could pay me enough.
Pay should absolutely be better, no doubt, but until teachers are allowed to get control of their classroom, and disruptive students actually face consequences, you're always going to see a major problem.
It's also hilarious how many hoops a teacher is forced to jump through to teach, but a sub who passed a single easy test is allowed to teach the same class. I frequently got long term subbing jobs that replaced full paid teachers, which the district loved because I was cheaper, and showed once again just how stupid some of the hurdles place in front of teachers are, as clearly they don't care when push comes to shove.
This was one of many reasons I quit teaching, but was certainly one of the more frustrating ones. There were no consequences. At all. I had a student whose only goal in life seemed to be to...
and disruptive students actually face consequences
This was one of many reasons I quit teaching, but was certainly one of the more frustrating ones.
There were no consequences. At all. I had a student whose only goal in life seemed to be to disrupt lessons. A few days of detention would at least allow the other students to focus for a bit, but he'd come right back. Alternative school? He'd be back in a week. Removed from class by the police? That happened twice in my classroom, though luckily only as a result of things that had happened beforehand. He wasn't gone long though.
I don't think I ever graded a single thing from him. He refused to participate in the class at all, so I never saw any work or had anything to put on record. His average was a zero.
But don't worry, he passed and came to my class the next grade level up, too.
I'm sure many out there would go watch some feel-good teaching movie and enthusiastically blame me for not turning his life around, but I had 149 other students so you can do the math on how much individual attention I could really devote to the issue.
Either way, certainly one of the most frustrating things. Though the fact I worked basically nonstop from wake to sleep and took stacks of essays home to grade every weekend for about the same money I made flipping burgers as a teenager weren't exactly highlights either.
Yeah I'm always hesitant to go into detail on the shit i've seen because I always seem to find the one person who swears they've never seen anything like that, but your stories line up much closer...
Yeah I'm always hesitant to go into detail on the shit i've seen because I always seem to find the one person who swears they've never seen anything like that, but your stories line up much closer with mine and my teacher friends.
I think the last straw was when a middle school student who had threatened a teachers life brought real bullets to class. The kid was back in their classroom next week and had to FIGHT to get them removed, to where they went down the hall.
This was not at what you'd consider a "bad" school or bad part of town. I'd say fairly middle of the road. The kid was also found to be dealing weed in quantities that would get an adult federal charges. It's fucking nuts.
Popping in on this to confirm your and @userexec's stories. I've experienced similar things in my career as a teacher as well. These specifics are hard to talk about in circles that aren't made up...
Yeah I'm always hesitant to go into detail on the shit i've seen because I always seem to find the one person who swears they've never seen anything like that, but your stories line up much closer with mine and my teacher friends.
Popping in on this to confirm your and @userexec's stories. I've experienced similar things in my career as a teacher as well.
These specifics are hard to talk about in circles that aren't made up of other teachers because most people outside of education have a sort of default feeling that the systems that surround these events in our schools should make some sort of sense. From the inside, they very clearly do NOT, but it's hard to help others grasp that disconnect if they don't have first hand experience with it.
I wish I could get people to understand that these types of stories aren't shocking outliers played for dramatic effect -- they are a representative sample that reflect widespread norms across many (maybe even most) schools in the country.
Do you think this is a new/recently exacerbated phenomenon? I do remember there being many problematic and distributive students during my time in school (graduated HS in 2013), but from the...
Do you think this is a new/recently exacerbated phenomenon? I do remember there being many problematic and distributive students during my time in school (graduated HS in 2013), but from the comments I’m seeing online it seems to be much worse than anything I experienced myself. I didn’t go to a particularly good set of schools or anything either - the facilities and textbooks were often outdated and in disrepair, and we missed multiple school days because the district just couldn’t afford to run the school.
Hard to say, to be honest. I've been teaching since about the time you probably entered high school, and it was already an issue then. I think social media has exacerbated some things (e.g....
Hard to say, to be honest.
I've been teaching since about the time you probably entered high school, and it was already an issue then. I think social media has exacerbated some things (e.g. "devious licks"), but the root problem isn't necessarily a new one.
Dwindling resources has definitely made things worse, as well as, IMO, the forced integration of low function Special Education students into general education classes without appropriate...
Dwindling resources has definitely made things worse, as well as, IMO, the forced integration of low function Special Education students into general education classes without appropriate supports. There was a push a few years back to get students into the "least restrictive environment" which is generally accepted as a normal classroom. But some of these children have intense emotional and mental disturbances that make the classroom more restrictive for their classmates. Then, because they're special education students, it is harder to remove that accommodation once granted.
Also, there was a big change in disproportionality laws because schools were suspended minorities at a far, far greater rate than white students. So there was a huge swing in the other direction where basically no one is suspended. Disproportionality is an important thing to eliminate, but, like always, schools half ass the implementation of systems like that (and restorative practices) and don't solve the actual problems.
My mother had a desk thrown at her-- by a fourth-grader. He was back in class within the week. This was a private school... and his parents were big donors. Not a recent story, even, this was more...
My mother had a desk thrown at her-- by a fourth-grader. He was back in class within the week. This was a private school... and his parents were big donors. Not a recent story, even, this was more than twenty years ago. She worked almost three decades at the job and always said the kids weren't the real problem, it was the administration and the parents. Admins would never do anything about bad behavior, and parents wouldn't listen when told their kid needed special help.
This is another thing. Laws around the world were made at a time where kids didn't even imagine doing felony level crimes. Yes there was always that one dude from a broken family who did something...
The kid was also found to be dealing weed in quantities that would get an adult federal charges.
This is another thing. Laws around the world were made at a time where kids didn't even imagine doing felony level crimes. Yes there was always that one dude from a broken family who did something stupid for every generation, but as a majority teenagers were fine, just being teenagers with zero impulse control who ended up doing stupid shit.
Laws were made so that one impulsive decision as a teenager wouldn't ruin your whole life, which is a great idea.
BUT, now we are in a state where gangs (I live outside of the US) specifically hire underage kids, because they are immune to all effects the legal system can do. Especially if their parents are checked out too. The kids get paid proper $$ for stealing, dealing and even mugging. And with the rise of Roadman culture even outside of the UK, kids consider it "cool" and actually aspire to become one.
A kid under 15yo can do anything they want, they can be assigned fines but they don't need to pay. In theory the parent should pay, but again there is nothing in the legal text that would force them. They can just tell the system to pound sand and nothing will happen.
The laws have to change, because kids don't implicitly respect the authority of teachers or law enforcement, they know their rights exactly and won't cooperate. They know that the teacher can't touch them physically and will abuse the fact to the detriment of everyone else in the class.
There needs to be some kind of ultimate check on parents - the ones who aren’t doing anything illegal but are just terrible to deal with. What should that be?
There needs to be some kind of ultimate check on parents - the ones who aren’t doing anything illegal but are just terrible to deal with. What should that be?
That's kinda the problem in that, ultimately, the school has no agency over the parents. Still, if their child continues to be disruptive, they need to be separated or removed. Modern teaching...
That's kinda the problem in that, ultimately, the school has no agency over the parents.
Still, if their child continues to be disruptive, they need to be separated or removed. Modern teaching feels like the whole "don't try to save someone who's drowning" situation, where one person can very quickly drag down everyone around them. Not just by making it harder to handle the room, but often influencing other students to behave the same as they realize there's no real consequences.
At some point you need to just say enough is enough. Put them on alternate paths segregated from some other students ( I really don't care what some extremely specific perfect environment study showed) and let them join back in should they behave/change their mind. If they don't fine, focus them on bare minimum materials (reading, writing, super basic math) and if they can't handle that, kick them out.
It sucks because there's SO many families that only get worse in this scenario, but I don't see how you handle it otherwise. The amount of just batshit insane behavior that is now tolerated (including outright dangerous behavior against fellow classmates and teachers) is just unsustainable.
My wife is a teacher in Canada, and while it’s by no means perfect here by the sounds of it it’s much better. I don’t think you need to go back to segregated schools and classes. What are teachers...
My wife is a teacher in Canada, and while it’s by no means perfect here by the sounds of it it’s much better.
I don’t think you need to go back to segregated schools and classes. What are teachers unions like in the USA? Because in my opinion, the solution basically writes itself — strong teachers unions.
Here in BC, all behaviours are classified on a matrix that affects limits on overall class size, how much assistance is to be provided by CEAs (educational assistants who provide support to individual students or small groups) and how much time they are allotted as relief during the workday to account for the increased administrative load from dealing with behaviour students.
None of this was just handed over, it was all negotiated for over the course of many contract negotiations.
I believe they're using segregated to mean "remove the disruptive students from the non-disruptive students in a more-permanent way," not the historical "brown students go to a different school."
I believe they're using segregated to mean "remove the disruptive students from the non-disruptive students in a more-permanent way," not the historical "brown students go to a different school."
Yea I understood what is meant, I disagree with the general premise. Removing any ‘disruptive’ students means a lot of manageable kids (with the right support) are severely, severely impacted. And...
Yea I understood what is meant, I disagree with the general premise.
Removing any ‘disruptive’ students means a lot of manageable kids (with the right support) are severely, severely impacted.
And just to be clear, obviously there is a line somewhere — there are definitely kids that can’t function in a classroom or are a danger to others. But the old way of doing things, where any children outside the norm (many of whom can manage just fine with one-on-one support), are safely tucked away in a special needs classroom is not the best approach.
It's really not 'outside the norm' under discussion... resources for kids who need them; ADHD, autism, counseling, and other developmental issues are exponentially more available than they were 30...
It's really not 'outside the norm' under discussion... resources for kids who need them; ADHD, autism, counseling, and other developmental issues are exponentially more available than they were 30 years ago (though this may also be zip code moving bias).
For the most part...these are kids who decided to give up and spend their days fucking off and encouraging others to do the same, day in and day out. In my school there were basically 5 kids that spent more of their days there than not, at least when they bothered to show up.
Thats a far cry from getting sent out for a day or so if they're having a shit day and lashing out.
The resources are often available, but we can't exactly tranq kids and force them to use them can we?
I guess I shouldn’t put words into anyone’s mouth so apologies if I was misreading. I will still maintain that lots of the problems American teachers currently face can be lessened by striking for...
I guess I shouldn’t put words into anyone’s mouth so apologies if I was misreading. I will still maintain that lots of the problems American teachers currently face can be lessened by striking for satisfactory working conditions.
Can't disagree there....but they've been striking to get bare minimums. At this point, further striking is probably more likely to get them banned from striking. The state of education (and labor)...
Can't disagree there....but they've been striking to get bare minimums. At this point, further striking is probably more likely to get them banned from striking.
The state of education (and labor) is in a bad place.
I think it's important to emphasize how much leverage teachers have. They are an educated group of people doing a job most people would not do, and in many cases could not do. Here, the teachers...
At this point, further striking is probably more likely to get them banned from striking.
I think it's important to emphasize how much leverage teachers have. They are an educated group of people doing a job most people would not do, and in many cases could not do.
Here, the teachers have gone on strikes extending into the school year a couple times in the last twenty years and they've been successful even in the face of hostile governments.
Here in Amerika, if workers are deemed too essential, they'll ban them from striking. The air traffic controllers were most notorious, but there's been constant murmurings about doing the same for...
In 2005 the courts ruled a BCTF strike that had extended into October as illegal and the government tried to legislate them back to work. The union said "that's nice", and the government brought...
In 2005 the courts ruled a BCTF strike that had extended into October as illegal and the government tried to legislate them back to work.
The union said "that's nice", and the government brought in a mediator a couple weeks later.
I mean, that is the only way that a strike is effective: if it flies in the face of the status quo. If it's deemed illegal that means its working. That's essentially what happened with PATCO, and...
I mean, that is the only way that a strike is effective: if it flies in the face of the status quo. If it's deemed illegal that means its working.
That's essentially what happened with PATCO, and all 11,345 striking workers were fired and banned from federal service. I have no doubts that someone would be dumb enough to pull that trigger against a teacher's union.
I'm sure some would want to but it would also be political suicide, there's no replacing teachers with people off the street, at least not without some serious public outcry and major side effects.
I have no doubts that someone would be dumb enough to pull that trigger against a teacher's union.
I'm sure some would want to but it would also be political suicide, there's no replacing teachers with people off the street, at least not without some serious public outcry and major side effects.
As @Dr_Amazing and @DefinitelyNotAFae pointed out in this sibling thread, there's already states with laws like this on the books. Things are very dire here, as I hadn't realized that myself....
Things are very dire here, as I hadn't realized that myself. There's states where this action would be cheered on, because of the "evils of teacher's unions". They'd probably be happy to instill pastors instead of science teachers.
Plus, there's vast parts of the country were a Republican could probably be caught killing somebody on camera and still be elected with 20% margin. And I won't mince words: The areas that are this anti-intellectual are all Republican.
Some states are also all too willing to dismantle public education. I am not saying labor action isn't the solution. But it's definitely more complicated than striking when they're willing to...
Some states are also all too willing to dismantle public education. I am not saying labor action isn't the solution. But it's definitely more complicated than striking when they're willing to cease employing you altogether and let the system die.
Kinda. The teacher is now forced to stay late as well, which can be problematic. What do you do when the kid just refuses to show up? We're talking about students who are well past detention, and...
Kinda.
The teacher is now forced to stay late as well, which can be problematic.
What do you do when the kid just refuses to show up?
We're talking about students who are well past detention, and generally supported, or ignored, by their parents when it comes to this behavior. Should you try to RPC/Suspend them, then the parents fight it, and the school backs down.
As I remember it from high school, there was a room where kids were sent, and they were sent immediately. I don't remember if they stayed late. Someone has to watch them, but it seems like it...
As I remember it from high school, there was a room where kids were sent, and they were sent immediately. I don't remember if they stayed late. Someone has to watch them, but it seems like it solves the immediate problem when someone is disrupting the classroom?
And if they don't go? Or if the room is full? I've literally seen all of this and more, and some students who just have their parents come in and scream that "how dare their kid be sent" so they...
And if they don't go? Or if the room is full? I've literally seen all of this and more, and some students who just have their parents come in and scream that "how dare their kid be sent" so they aren't.
We had In-School Suspension back in the day that did this. A classroom dedicated to the assholes that didn't have the courtesy to drop out. If the class got full, they'd take over the auditorium....
We had In-School Suspension back in the day that did this. A classroom dedicated to the assholes that didn't have the courtesy to drop out. If the class got full, they'd take over the auditorium.
Foist them in there with a private security guard and a handful of kindergarden-level workbooks. Maybe put up a nice poster "You're doing this to yourself."
That's the "In School Suspension" room. At my old school, those kids could do whatever the hell they wanted in there as long as they were quiet. Most just had headphones in and sat on their phones...
That's the "In School Suspension" room. At my old school, those kids could do whatever the hell they wanted in there as long as they were quiet. Most just had headphones in and sat on their phones all day. It's not a punishment, it's a reward.
Exactly. Sending them to ISS used to be an actual punishment, now its a reward. Even if you didn't do your work back in the day, you just sat quietly bored out of your mind. Now they sit quietly...
Exactly. Sending them to ISS used to be an actual punishment, now its a reward. Even if you didn't do your work back in the day, you just sat quietly bored out of your mind. Now they sit quietly and just scroll, which is what they would be doing in their free time anyway.
Nothing. That's the problem. Somewhat like the political spectrum, there was a lot of "well the kid would never do that" or "the parents would stop them at that point" going on. For various...
Nothing. That's the problem. Somewhat like the political spectrum, there was a lot of "well the kid would never do that" or "the parents would stop them at that point" going on. For various reasons, there's large swaths of kids now who just do not give a fuck, their parents can't or won't give a fuck, and the school just shrugs their shoulders and puts it on the teacher to "improve their classroom management" or some nonsense like that.
I’m wondering what other countries do, and what changed in the US? It wasn’t always like this, I don’t think? Also, it seems like there should be a constituency among parents that would support...
I’m wondering what other countries do, and what changed in the US? It wasn’t always like this, I don’t think?
Also, it seems like there should be a constituency among parents that would support leadership to put in place better discipline? Why does democracy not work here?
It was not always like this, but parents cared more about their kids behavior and schools were more willing to stand behind their faculty. And arguably, democracy is working. The parents don't...
It was not always like this, but parents cared more about their kids behavior and schools were more willing to stand behind their faculty.
And arguably, democracy is working. The parents don't want to watch their kids, and they don't think they're doing anything wrong.
I mentioned in another comment that the democratic (electoral) process that controls education enables parents and their children to be the consumers of education as a product and influence its...
I mentioned in another comment that the democratic (electoral) process that controls education enables parents and their children to be the consumers of education as a product and influence its production.
There really ought to be appointed officials who are relatively insulated from politics who wield power to enforce long-term educational objectives that are in the long-term interests of parents and their children, much like how the FDA acts in the interests of consumers who are unable to watch their own interests when it comes to food and drugs.
I've also mentioned in a controversial comment on another thread that there ought to be parenting classes. The parents who don't care or, maybe worse, think that they're helping their children by enabling their poor behavior or school performance—they don't want their children to get left behind by their peers and feel bad, etc.—in the short term are unable to foresee the long-term consequences: their children come out of the school system dumb and socially maladjusted with little to offer to our society and an advanced knowledge economy, perhaps destined for a lifetime of crap jobs or the prison-industrial complex.
Perhaps schools should offer these parents a Child Future Simulator, where you plug in the child's academic and behavioral record, show their remaining K-12 school trajectory sans intervention, and then show their probabilistic futures, to help them better connect the dots between their short-term enabling and the long-term consequences.
I'd be +1 for free parenting classes. However, I'm betting the venn diagram overlap between "will attend a voluntary parenting class" and "doesn't need a parenting class" is fairly large. Part of...
I'd be +1 for free parenting classes. However, I'm betting the venn diagram overlap between "will attend a voluntary parenting class" and "doesn't need a parenting class" is fairly large.
Part of the problem is a lot of parenting problems stem from poverty....hard to be involved with your kids life if you see them maybe 2 hours a day because you're working two jobs to make ends meet.
And the other major problems stem from people who wouldn't listen even if the class is mandatory. I blame ego-driven culture.
I'm betting the venn diagram of "screams at teachers for disciplining their student" and "doesn't tip delivery drivers" is practically a circle. And they would spend the entire parenting class mansplaining to the teacher how good of a parent they are.
How do you know it’s what they want? Parents do individually advocate for their own kids and sometimes in harmful ways, but I’m wondering if a majority of parents would feel this way about the...
How do you know it’s what they want? Parents do individually advocate for their own kids and sometimes in harmful ways, but I’m wondering if a majority of parents would feel this way about the system if they understood what’s going on?
Because I've seen, lived, and worked in these environments? There is a disturbing trend towards having children be unaccountable because that would be "wrong" or "mean" or imply that they aren't...
Because I've seen, lived, and worked in these environments? There is a disturbing trend towards having children be unaccountable because that would be "wrong" or "mean" or imply that they aren't perfect.
Just slews of parents and admin ignoring the behavior of children who are clearly out of line? Just about every single problem child i've dealt with has an "IEP" which is an individualized...
Just slews of parents and admin ignoring the behavior of children who are clearly out of line? Just about every single problem child i've dealt with has an "IEP" which is an individualized education plan, or sadly, a blank check to behave terribly.
It's supposed to be for children with very legit problems, but is disturbingly overused to excuse just about any behavior, and to give the admin something to hide behind as to why they can't do anything. The parents fight to get their kid and IEP, they fail the grade, the school lets them graduate anyways.
The simple truth is that everyone, except the teachers and other classmates, gets what they want.
The parents get to drop their kid off and forget about them until school is over, and don't have to hear about how their kid is causing issues.
The admin gets to not see their stats dive because they'll straight up fudge grades to make sure enough kids graduate (the number of children in middle school who can't READ but are in normal classes with an IEP is disturbing).
All it costs is anyone else's ability to learn in class.
Make school boards appointed rather than elected. Insulate them from direct parental pressure. They would still have accountability to the legislature. Stop making the metric “How many students...
Make school boards appointed rather than elected. Insulate them from direct parental pressure. They would still have accountability to the legislature.
Stop making the metric “How many students are graduating?” That is too easy to game. The exact replacement metric is debatable, but it will probably be something like “How many students can graduate while meeting criteria x/y/z?” (With x/y/z likely taking the form of an exit exam).
Neither of these is going to be politically popular (telling parents “Yes, you shouldn’t have as much influence on your child’s education” or “No, little Johnny isn’t actually ready to graduate high school, they can’t do basic algebra or read above a fourth grade level” aren’t exactly winning messages).
There’s also the reality that the best students tend to have a good home life. So making it so students are happier outside of school would likely go a long way, but the government has less control over that and it would likely be very expensive.
This looks flashy at first glance, but the conditions that the author buries in the article make it a complete non-starter: I work 180 school days a year. If I get rid of my summer, my number of...
This looks flashy at first glance, but the conditions that the author buries in the article make it a complete non-starter:
That’s why this hefty pay raise comes with two strings attached.
First, a longer school year. Eliminating summer break might spark a national uprising among 8-year-olds and tourism-industry executives. But the nine-month school year is a relic. (Not many kids in Anacostia or Bethesda spend July tending the soybean crop and preparing for harvest.) Professionals work year-round. Teachers should, too. A longer school year could also reduce summer learning loss.
I work 180 school days a year. If I get rid of my summer, my number of work days goes to 240, which is a 33% increase. The article notes that the median salary for teachers in the US is ~$66,000. If we raise that by 33% to match the increased work year, then the median teacher would be making $88,000. This means that the author is effectively advocating a $12,000 or ~14% raise. While this is certainly nothing to sneeze at, it's not nearly as radical as the author is proposing. It doesn't even come close to matching pay gap identified from the think tanks quoted in the opinion piece (emphasis mine):
EPI calculated that, in 2022, teachers earned only 74 cents on the dollar compared with comparably educated professionals. The right-leaning Hoover Institution reached a similar conclusion in its 2020 report on educator compensation, showing that, even adjusting for factors such as talent and experience, “teachers are paid 22 percent less than they would be if they were in jobs in the U.S. economy outside of teaching.”
This proposal also sidesteps the issue identified in the original article: burnout. We already get two months off for summer and yet we are taking more days off of work and leaving the profession. Taking away summer from teachers would almost certainly accelerate burnout and result in even fewer teachers staying in the career. Summer is the biggest perk we have in our jobs. I consider it an actual payment for me in the form of a "time bonus". I can say, quite confidently, that if my job became year-round, I would simply leave the field.
The second condition the author proposes isn't quite as significant as the first one, but I feel obligated to mention it:
Second, greater accountability. Many teachers are excellent; some are heroic. But any parent knows that a few just aren’t up to the job. Under current employment arrangements, it’s difficult to steer these underperformers out of the profession. And with pay based largely on seniority, mediocre teachers lack much incentive to depart or even to improve. Low-performing, less-committed peers erode the morale of the majority of teachers who do their jobs well. Treating all teachers like professionals means showing a few teachers the door.
Awful teachers certainly do exist and certainly do erode the morale of other teachers and effect negative outcomes for students, but the "they're too hard to fire!" sentiment is a canard. Firing bad teachers is genuinely possible but relies on administrators doing their jobs adequately and following proper process. Many of them don't do this for a variety of reasons (at best they're as overworked as us teachers; at worst they're negligent or actively protect the bad teachers), but regardless of whether or not they do, getting rid of bad teachers simply isn't a solution when we are experiencing widespread teacher shortages. Many administrators will begrudgingly keep bad teachers on simply because there is no one to replace them.
On a final note, the whole "good teacher" versus "bad teacher" dichotomy that the author puts forth here is yet another misdirection from the bygone NCLB era of American education that really needs to be put to bed for good. Yes, there are some genuinely awful teachers who should not be in classrooms. There are, however, far more fundamentally "good" teachers who are overworked, undersupported, and spread too thin. This makes them functionally "bad" teachers not because of anything innate to their specific character or skillset but because the systemic factors in place that should be supporting their practices are absent.
Let's also not discount the incredible infrastructure improvements that year-round school would require. In many areas classrooms don't have air conditioning because they aren't used in the summer.
Let's also not discount the incredible infrastructure improvements that year-round school would require. In many areas classrooms don't have air conditioning because they aren't used in the summer.
That should be the starting salary in a low-income area for teachers. In areas like where I live, $100K would still be tough to get by on, and many teachers at the top of the pay bracket don't get...
That should be the starting salary in a low-income area for teachers.
In areas like where I live, $100K would still be tough to get by on, and many teachers at the top of the pay bracket don't get that if they've been teaching less than 30 years.
You'll have to try very hard to convince me that education ISN'T bring dismantled and degraded on purpose. As George Carlin once said, "They want you smart enough to push a button, but not smart...
You'll have to try very hard to convince me that education ISN'T bring dismantled and degraded on purpose.
As George Carlin once said, "They want you smart enough to push a button, but not smart enough to ask questions".
... And this is ignoring the parenting side of everything. I'm VERY firm in my (also very unpopular) belief that some people have no business having or raising kids.
I'm not sure. Corporate America wants reliable, educated workers. American education culture is all about questioning authority, compared to European and especially Asian education cultures. We're...
I'm not sure. Corporate America wants reliable, educated workers. American education culture is all about questioning authority, compared to European and especially Asian education cultures. We're also failing to educate many students to even push a button.
I think the 'dismantling' of education is just an emergent process, resulting from:
Mainstream American culture not valuing education much
The consequences of underfunding education are felt decades late, so voters feel little urgency
The democratic process that controls education actually harms it by subjecting educators to local whims
edit:
Mainstream American culture not valuing education much
On this point, we do see that certain communities that do value education have good academic results, exceeding expectations even when adjusted for income: Jewish, Chinese, Indian, Nigerian, etc.
I recently caught up with a friend who's trying out substitute teaching in the Bay Area. He's Jewish, and he recounted how some students have straight up told him that they're not going to respect...
When teachers do miss work, there often are not enough substitutes available to fill in. In Des Moines, officials can typically find substitutes for a little over half of the 300 daily absences.
Some substitutes were reluctant to return after the pandemic closures; others took different jobs and never came back. The pay for substitutes, which averages around $20 an hour, is less competitive in a strong economy.
I recently caught up with a friend who's trying out substitute teaching in the Bay Area. He's Jewish, and he recounted how some students have straight up told him that they're not going to respect him because he's white. He's not going to stick with it. The pay is meh, and the children suck.
I see a lot of it boiling down to:
Teachers are underpaid relative to cost of living.
Students have more discipline issues nowadays.
Together it gives teaching the impression of being a financially and emotionally unrewarding as a profession. There's a part of me that wants to teach children — but I also met this one teacher from Stockton who walked with a cane because her students had pushed her down the stairs twice; she told me to avoid teaching at all costs.
I think the underfunding and under-supporting of education and our teachers will have major ramifications down the road. Half of California students don't meet state standards for language; for math, that's two-thirds not meeting standards. How are these kids going to make it in an increasingly competitive, knowledge-intensive world? (My guess is they're not.)
This article is pretty accurately describing the situation I've seen here in Canada too. I've seen it from several sides - coming from a family with a teacher father, becoming a teacher and then a...
This article is pretty accurately describing the situation I've seen here in Canada too.
I've seen it from several sides - coming from a family with a teacher father, becoming a teacher and then a principal myself, and now having a son who is also a teacher.
The main thing I believe that causes teachers to give up in the classroom, call in sick, start asking for extra days off is... a lack of respect.
I don't know anyone who went into this profession for the pay, but there are a few who will admit that the long holidays were a big draw. But that perk wears thin if teacher's don't find they're being respected in the classroom. Part of that comes down to their own classroom management skills, but a lot of it is the calibre of students in the school and the overall tone being set by the administration. If a teacher feels that admin has their back and that if push comes to shove the parents will respect their choices and discipline in the classroom, they will put up with a lot of flak from even the most unruly kids. But if that backing evaporates or its just so inconsistent that a teacher never knows if they're going to be supported or hung out to dry, it breaks their spirit and elevates stress to make teaching such a chore that its hard to continue. Over time, that dark cloud will kill even the best teacher's love for teaching - I've seen more than one teacher in tears and ready to pack it in after being verbally abused by students who were completely out of line, even vicious.
Honestly, salaried teacher pay here isn't bad - teachers make around 100k by their 10th year, but substitute teacher pay is still a bit weak at $224 a day which is about 40k if you only subbed all year. Higher sub pay would definitely help. But even more would be running a school where students and parents give teachers the respect and support they deserve.
In contrast to the wild Gr. 9 boys I used to have to corral when teaching a lesson, another family member teaches some 18 yr old south Asian students who have only been in Canada for a few months. Some of them actually stand up out of respect when she enters the classroom. Last week she had a student touch her foot before their one on one conversation - in India it's a sign of respect for an elder. I'm not saying Canadian students should learn to do that, but I'd settle for learning not to swear at a teacher or openly defying them in the classroom and learning to put their phones away and listen when given instruction is a more than reasonable minimum.
Yea that 100k should be inside of like 3 years. I managed that as a DBA fresh out of college with just a Bachelors. Last I checked most teaching jobs require a Masters, and is an exponentially...
Yea that 100k should be inside of like 3 years. I managed that as a DBA fresh out of college with just a Bachelors.
Last I checked most teaching jobs require a Masters, and is an exponentially harder job.
I had to learn SQL and read documentation, which is annoying but not hard. A Kindergarden teacher needs to wrangle 20+ 5-6 year olds. I can't even wrangle 6 without having a mental breakdown.
Teachers should be right up there with doctors in terms of pay, but for some reason we don't do that, even though with no teachers there'd be no doctors.
I subbed for a school year about 7 years ago. Never again. The kids were fine, and some of them were even interns I had over the summer and knew me! It was the damn parents and admins being...
I subbed for a school year about 7 years ago. Never again. The kids were fine, and some of them were even interns I had over the summer and knew me! It was the damn parents and admins being disruptive during the day that got to me. Why in the world are parents texting and calling their kids in the middle of the school day, or randomly popping in to drop off their lunch or a forgotten item? What happened to kids waiting between periods to run to the office to pick up their dropped off book?
I mean, an upside to the increased security is that, at least at my kid's school, is that unless fully vetted to help in a classroom that day, or a special event, nobody makes it past the...
I mean, an upside to the increased security is that, at least at my kid's school, is that unless fully vetted to help in a classroom that day, or a special event, nobody makes it past the airlocked doors, even for a pickup or dropoff.
Substitute teaching should be like jury duty. Everyone gets put into a pool and substitute teachers should get drawn out of a hat like jurors do. If the public saw what schools are like, things...
Substitute teaching should be like jury duty. Everyone gets put into a pool and substitute teachers should get drawn out of a hat like jurors do. If the public saw what schools are like, things would be changed real quick.
I'm not so sure this wouldn't be a bad idea, honestly. The exam required to be a substitute teacher in California is laughably easy. I passed it without studying, and I am famously horrible at...
I'm not so sure this wouldn't be a bad idea, honestly. The exam required to be a substitute teacher in California is laughably easy. I passed it without studying, and I am famously horrible at exams. But I also had classroom experience before the exam, having been a preschool teacher, camp counselor to specialty camps and a dance teacher.
I personally think that if you're a parent, you should be required to do some continuing education while your child is in school.
I like the idea of subbing being akin to jury duty, where people of all walks of life are required to spend time in the classroom. It would be good for the students and the adults in the world to see people of different ethnicities, religions, abilities, and careers to learn more about them, and see people as people, and adults can see what the schools are like in their area. Obviously, not everyone is cut out to be in a classroom, but those people will have to have exemptions.
Perhaps the people who can't cut it as a substitute would be required to donate in other ways for the extra duties teachers are roped into. Like working the ticket line at the basketball game, etc.
Perhaps the people who can't cut it as a substitute would be required to donate in other ways for the extra duties teachers are roped into. Like working the ticket line at the basketball game, etc.
A teacher walks into her classroom for first period and sees only a single student sitting in a desk. More odd than the empty classroom, the student is someone she doesn't recognize. She's not so much surprised as she is confused, but she dutifully waits for the bell and then she starts the class the way she always does: by calling roll.
"Living Wage?" she asks. There's no answer from the classroom. The one student in attendance just sits there.
"Alright," she says to herself, "Living Wage is absent" and marks it on her roster.
Next student: "Respect from the Community?"
More silence. She marks down another absence.
"Support from Administrators?"
The student speaks up for the first time: "Nah, they're absent too."
"Oh, uh, thank you for your help" she says. "By the way, have you seen Behavioral Support in class recently?"
"They're also absent," the child says.
This pattern continues. The teacher dutifully goes down her roster, calling out the names of Practical Class Sizes, Curricular Materials, Enough Time to Get Work Done, and Safety.
They are, all, of course absent. Downtrodden and clearly realizing that her principled commitment to her daily routine is reaching both absurd and sad levels, she decides to cut the process short and skip the last few names on the list. It's abundantly clear to her: they are not here.
She looks at the student sitting in the desk. "Alright, what's your name?"
The student, with a bit of hesitation in his voice, says "I don't want to be rude or anything Miss, but we have met before."
She's genuinely taken aback. "We have?"
"Yeah, my name is The Profound Sense of Satisfaction You Get When You Help Out Other People".
The teacher takes a deep breath. She did know him. She just hadn't seen him in so long that she genuinely forgot what he looked like.
"I'm so sorry, Satisfaction! Of course I know you. It's just... been a while for me. You haven't been around much."
"Yeah, sorry about that" he apologizes. "I came here today to let you know that I think what you're doing is really important. I'm going to try to show up more often, since I know it matters to you that I'm here in your class."
"Seriously?" she asks. She is near tears.
"LOL, NOPE!" he yells with glee. "Nobody else is here so why I should I stick around? I'm gone, and I'm not coming back. Peace!"
With one swift motion, he's up and out the door. The teacher is left entirely alone in her empty classroom.
She logs into her school account and just sits there, silently.
She clicks over to her calendar.
She schedules a sick day for tomorrow.
Maybe pay them a living wage?
I do a bit of private tutoring. My background is in engineering, and I'm currently in a PhD program. I have extensive experience as an educator, been tutoring students for over 20 years. I even have a Masters degree in education. I do some private tutoring and have posted some ads at times on community social media spaces. I don't post such ads often, no more than once or twice a year. However, when I do offer my services, I do so making clear I'm looking for private tutoring.
Private tutoring isn't cheap. I typically charge $70-75 for a one hour tutoring session, and many tutors certainly go higher. $75 sounds like a lot, but that's the cost for me to come to your house for a single hour. If I was looking to work such hours, and someone wanted to hire me full time as a tutor, I would charge far less than $75 per hour. That charge includes pay for travel time, vehicle costs, and all the unpaid work I do coordinating with students and their parents. I have to charge $70-75 for a session just to make $20-25 when all the costs are considered. That's simply the nature of hiring someone to come work on an ad-hoc basis in your home. A plumber will charge you $100, at a bare absolute unheard of minimum, even if all they do is come to your house and turn a single nut. Traveling is expensive, and if you're hiring short term work, you need to be able to pay more. This is also all 1099 work and of course doesn't pay payroll taxes, insurance, etc. Salary workers can ignore the time and cost of a commute; private contractors can't.
So in short, my usual rate is about $70-75 for an hour of teaching, and that rate is very reasonable.
A few months ago, when I posted my tutoring info, I was contacted by the principal of a local private school. They wanted to see if I was interested in serving as a substitute. They were offering.....$18 an hour. This is barely above minimum wage in my area. I can literally make more working at McDonalds. This is their standard substitute rate, and they do not budge on it. This principal seriously expected someone with years of education and technical experience, two Masters degrees, and most of a PhD to be willing to work for $18 per hour. And this of course isn't some full-time job. They're not offering $18 an hour at 40 hours a week with retirement and health insurance on top. They're offering $18 per hour for short-term temporary work with no benefits whatsoever. And they're looking for substitutes, which means they want to be able to call you at 7 in the morning and expect you to drop everything and come in for a day or half day. For $18 an hour.
Now, I probably should have just not responded. But I was so insulted by it that my feelings got the best of me. I replied, and I laid it all out. I laid out my experience, credentials, my usual rate, and why I charge it. And then, like a good educator, I actually did the math.
The school in question is not some poor inner city school. It's a private school that charges over $14,000 a year in tuition. So let's run through the numbers. I know that scholarships to such schools are a thing, so let's imagine that the average student pays half that price once financial aid is considered. So let's imagine the average student pays $7k in annual tuition. Let's assume a low number of students per class at 20. A class of 20 brings in $140k a year in tuition, or, if we assume a 180 day school year, $777 per instruction day. In a class of 20 students, those twenty students will pay perhaps a combined $777 for their tuition.
Now, I'm not an unreasonable person. I understand not all that money can go to the instructor. If I were standing in a school, I would say, "I understand all this <gestures vaguely in all directions> needs to be paid for." There's far more to a school than just the instructor's pay; facilities, support staff, insurance, etc.
So what is fair? Personally, I don't at all think a pay rate of 1/3 of the charged tuition is unreasonable. Shouldn't the people actually teaching the classes, the central purpose of the school, upon which all the other stuff is mere accessory, be paid a measly third of the tuition charged? That still allows the school to burn 2/3 of resources in things outside of instruction. Shouldn't a mere third of what students pay actually go towards their instruction? (Especially when this is a nonprofit and the school doesn't pay income or property tax.)
At this 1/3 pay level, that would come to about $260 per instruction day, or, if assuming 7 hours of instruction time, $37 per hour, or over twice that they were offering. I would be willing to charge less per hour for a larger block of substitute work than I would for a single one hour session, so I would be willing to do it for something like $40 per hour. And really, that's not out of line with teacher salaries. At 2000 hours per year, $40 per hour comes to an annual rate of $80,000. And while most teachers don't make that much, when you factor in benefits, it's around that range. And really, you should expect to pay MORE for short-term staff than you do for permanent employees, buying in bulk and all that.
Anyway, I laid all this out in a long email. I was actually quite interested in potentially doing this. Popping into a science or math classroom and serving as a substitute doesn't sound that bad. I love working with kids. But this school made that completely impossible through their greed. I normally don't contact employers out of the blue and tell them they're not paying enough. But if someone contacts me unsolicited, I don't mind laying it out there. Honestly, it's pretty rude to contact someone up and make such a comically insulting offer. I laid all this out, in a professional and calm manner, explaining what my expected rate would be. Unsurprisingly, they never responded.
So yeah, I have no doubt that schools may be having trouble finding substitutes. And I have zero sympathy for them. It's like every high school is run by administrators who never finished 8th grade and don't know how to do basic math. Hell, they probably never finished 3rd grade; at least 3rd graders can do multiplication. The sense I get is that schools simply deeply, deeply disrespect substitute teachers. They view them as volunteers undeserving of pay or respect. Their idea of a substitute is a retired teacher who already has a comfortable retirement taken care of and wants to occasionally substitute as a means of getting out of the house.
Substituting doesn't have to be this way. The stereotype of a substitute is a complete professional wash-out who cares nothing for students and is a terrible educator. Think of how a substitute would be portrayed on The Simpsons, someone who shows up hung over, wreaking of booze, who starts a video for a class before passing out, a glorified babysitter. That's the stereotype of a substitute. In a different world, being a substitute would actually be a highly respected career. In fact, the best teachers might be substitutes.
Imagine if we expected substitutes not merely to serve as babysitters, but actually offer instruction equal or even superior to any regular instructor. Imagine the type of skills one would need in order to be able to effectively teach an incredible variety of classes, and actually manage to teach them well. Imagine if a substitute could actually teach calculus, physics, chemistry, biology, and even language arts and arts like visual and performing arts. Imagine someone so erudite they could teach a third grade class on Monday, 8th grade language arts on Tuesday, AP Physics C on Wednesday, 6th grade human growth and development on Thursday, and drama class on Friday. Oh, and for good measure, high school shop class the next week. And imagine they could actually excel at all of these roles. This platonic ideal substitute is a genuine polymath who can weave in and out of a dozen disciplines and actually provide high quality instruction in any of them. (I'm certainly nowhere near this god-tier level, but I think this would be the ideal vision of a substitute if we actually respected it as its own profession.) Someone with such a rich background they can jump into virtually any K12 classroom and offer high-quality instruction. When you're calling in a substitute, you're not calling in some washed-out drunk. You're calling Mary Poppins, a damn miracle worker. And Mary Poppins does not come cheap.
Edit: typos
When I have to call out, I know the work assigned won't get done by 90% of the class because most substitutes in my area are not great. But they're not great because they get paid like $120 a day with no benefits so no one of quality is going to take that job except retired teachers who just want something to do.
Honestly, until they do something about the rules around teaching, where the admin exists to just do whatever whims the insane parents come up with, I don't think you could pay me enough.
Pay should absolutely be better, no doubt, but until teachers are allowed to get control of their classroom, and disruptive students actually face consequences, you're always going to see a major problem.
It's also hilarious how many hoops a teacher is forced to jump through to teach, but a sub who passed a single easy test is allowed to teach the same class. I frequently got long term subbing jobs that replaced full paid teachers, which the district loved because I was cheaper, and showed once again just how stupid some of the hurdles place in front of teachers are, as clearly they don't care when push comes to shove.
This was one of many reasons I quit teaching, but was certainly one of the more frustrating ones.
There were no consequences. At all. I had a student whose only goal in life seemed to be to disrupt lessons. A few days of detention would at least allow the other students to focus for a bit, but he'd come right back. Alternative school? He'd be back in a week. Removed from class by the police? That happened twice in my classroom, though luckily only as a result of things that had happened beforehand. He wasn't gone long though.
I don't think I ever graded a single thing from him. He refused to participate in the class at all, so I never saw any work or had anything to put on record. His average was a zero.
But don't worry, he passed and came to my class the next grade level up, too.
I'm sure many out there would go watch some feel-good teaching movie and enthusiastically blame me for not turning his life around, but I had 149 other students so you can do the math on how much individual attention I could really devote to the issue.
Either way, certainly one of the most frustrating things. Though the fact I worked basically nonstop from wake to sleep and took stacks of essays home to grade every weekend for about the same money I made flipping burgers as a teenager weren't exactly highlights either.
Yeah I'm always hesitant to go into detail on the shit i've seen because I always seem to find the one person who swears they've never seen anything like that, but your stories line up much closer with mine and my teacher friends.
I think the last straw was when a middle school student who had threatened a teachers life brought real bullets to class. The kid was back in their classroom next week and had to FIGHT to get them removed, to where they went down the hall.
This was not at what you'd consider a "bad" school or bad part of town. I'd say fairly middle of the road. The kid was also found to be dealing weed in quantities that would get an adult federal charges. It's fucking nuts.
Popping in on this to confirm your and @userexec's stories. I've experienced similar things in my career as a teacher as well.
These specifics are hard to talk about in circles that aren't made up of other teachers because most people outside of education have a sort of default feeling that the systems that surround these events in our schools should make some sort of sense. From the inside, they very clearly do NOT, but it's hard to help others grasp that disconnect if they don't have first hand experience with it.
I wish I could get people to understand that these types of stories aren't shocking outliers played for dramatic effect -- they are a representative sample that reflect widespread norms across many (maybe even most) schools in the country.
Do you think this is a new/recently exacerbated phenomenon? I do remember there being many problematic and distributive students during my time in school (graduated HS in 2013), but from the comments I’m seeing online it seems to be much worse than anything I experienced myself. I didn’t go to a particularly good set of schools or anything either - the facilities and textbooks were often outdated and in disrepair, and we missed multiple school days because the district just couldn’t afford to run the school.
Hard to say, to be honest.
I've been teaching since about the time you probably entered high school, and it was already an issue then. I think social media has exacerbated some things (e.g. "devious licks"), but the root problem isn't necessarily a new one.
Dwindling resources has definitely made things worse, as well as, IMO, the forced integration of low function Special Education students into general education classes without appropriate supports. There was a push a few years back to get students into the "least restrictive environment" which is generally accepted as a normal classroom. But some of these children have intense emotional and mental disturbances that make the classroom more restrictive for their classmates. Then, because they're special education students, it is harder to remove that accommodation once granted.
Also, there was a big change in disproportionality laws because schools were suspended minorities at a far, far greater rate than white students. So there was a huge swing in the other direction where basically no one is suspended. Disproportionality is an important thing to eliminate, but, like always, schools half ass the implementation of systems like that (and restorative practices) and don't solve the actual problems.
My mother had a desk thrown at her-- by a fourth-grader. He was back in class within the week. This was a private school... and his parents were big donors. Not a recent story, even, this was more than twenty years ago. She worked almost three decades at the job and always said the kids weren't the real problem, it was the administration and the parents. Admins would never do anything about bad behavior, and parents wouldn't listen when told their kid needed special help.
Children aren't the ones leading the push to ban books, so I would say that parents are absolutely the problem.
This is another thing. Laws around the world were made at a time where kids didn't even imagine doing felony level crimes. Yes there was always that one dude from a broken family who did something stupid for every generation, but as a majority teenagers were fine, just being teenagers with zero impulse control who ended up doing stupid shit.
Laws were made so that one impulsive decision as a teenager wouldn't ruin your whole life, which is a great idea.
BUT, now we are in a state where gangs (I live outside of the US) specifically hire underage kids, because they are immune to all effects the legal system can do. Especially if their parents are checked out too. The kids get paid proper $$ for stealing, dealing and even mugging. And with the rise of Roadman culture even outside of the UK, kids consider it "cool" and actually aspire to become one.
A kid under 15yo can do anything they want, they can be assigned fines but they don't need to pay. In theory the parent should pay, but again there is nothing in the legal text that would force them. They can just tell the system to pound sand and nothing will happen.
The laws have to change, because kids don't implicitly respect the authority of teachers or law enforcement, they know their rights exactly and won't cooperate. They know that the teacher can't touch them physically and will abuse the fact to the detriment of everyone else in the class.
There needs to be some kind of ultimate check on parents - the ones who aren’t doing anything illegal but are just terrible to deal with. What should that be?
That's kinda the problem in that, ultimately, the school has no agency over the parents.
Still, if their child continues to be disruptive, they need to be separated or removed. Modern teaching feels like the whole "don't try to save someone who's drowning" situation, where one person can very quickly drag down everyone around them. Not just by making it harder to handle the room, but often influencing other students to behave the same as they realize there's no real consequences.
At some point you need to just say enough is enough. Put them on alternate paths segregated from some other students ( I really don't care what some extremely specific perfect environment study showed) and let them join back in should they behave/change their mind. If they don't fine, focus them on bare minimum materials (reading, writing, super basic math) and if they can't handle that, kick them out.
It sucks because there's SO many families that only get worse in this scenario, but I don't see how you handle it otherwise. The amount of just batshit insane behavior that is now tolerated (including outright dangerous behavior against fellow classmates and teachers) is just unsustainable.
My wife is a teacher in Canada, and while it’s by no means perfect here by the sounds of it it’s much better.
I don’t think you need to go back to segregated schools and classes. What are teachers unions like in the USA? Because in my opinion, the solution basically writes itself — strong teachers unions.
Here in BC, all behaviours are classified on a matrix that affects limits on overall class size, how much assistance is to be provided by CEAs (educational assistants who provide support to individual students or small groups) and how much time they are allotted as relief during the workday to account for the increased administrative load from dealing with behaviour students.
None of this was just handed over, it was all negotiated for over the course of many contract negotiations.
I believe they're using segregated to mean "remove the disruptive students from the non-disruptive students in a more-permanent way," not the historical "brown students go to a different school."
Yea I understood what is meant, I disagree with the general premise.
Removing any ‘disruptive’ students means a lot of manageable kids (with the right support) are severely, severely impacted.
And just to be clear, obviously there is a line somewhere — there are definitely kids that can’t function in a classroom or are a danger to others. But the old way of doing things, where any children outside the norm (many of whom can manage just fine with one-on-one support), are safely tucked away in a special needs classroom is not the best approach.
It's really not 'outside the norm' under discussion... resources for kids who need them; ADHD, autism, counseling, and other developmental issues are exponentially more available than they were 30 years ago (though this may also be zip code moving bias).
For the most part...these are kids who decided to give up and spend their days fucking off and encouraging others to do the same, day in and day out. In my school there were basically 5 kids that spent more of their days there than not, at least when they bothered to show up.
Thats a far cry from getting sent out for a day or so if they're having a shit day and lashing out.
The resources are often available, but we can't exactly tranq kids and force them to use them can we?
I guess I shouldn’t put words into anyone’s mouth so apologies if I was misreading. I will still maintain that lots of the problems American teachers currently face can be lessened by striking for satisfactory working conditions.
Can't disagree there....but they've been striking to get bare minimums. At this point, further striking is probably more likely to get them banned from striking.
The state of education (and labor) is in a bad place.
I think it's important to emphasize how much leverage teachers have. They are an educated group of people doing a job most people would not do, and in many cases could not do.
Here, the teachers have gone on strikes extending into the school year a couple times in the last twenty years and they've been successful even in the face of hostile governments.
Here in Amerika, if workers are deemed too essential, they'll ban them from striking.
The air traffic controllers were most notorious, but there's been constant murmurings about doing the same for nurses and teachers.
In 2005 the courts ruled a BCTF strike that had extended into October as illegal and the government tried to legislate them back to work.
The union said "that's nice", and the government brought in a mediator a couple weeks later.
I mean, that is the only way that a strike is effective: if it flies in the face of the status quo. If it's deemed illegal that means its working.
That's essentially what happened with PATCO, and all 11,345 striking workers were fired and banned from federal service. I have no doubts that someone would be dumb enough to pull that trigger against a teacher's union.
I'm sure some would want to but it would also be political suicide, there's no replacing teachers with people off the street, at least not without some serious public outcry and major side effects.
As @Dr_Amazing and @DefinitelyNotAFae pointed out in this sibling thread, there's already states with laws like this on the books.
Things are very dire here, as I hadn't realized that myself. There's states where this action would be cheered on, because of the "evils of teacher's unions". They'd probably be happy to instill pastors instead of science teachers.
Plus, there's vast parts of the country were a Republican could probably be caught killing somebody on camera and still be elected with 20% margin. And I won't mince words: The areas that are this anti-intellectual are all Republican.
Theres definitely states where being part of collective action (not even necessarily a full strike) can get your teachers license taken away.
Some states are also all too willing to dismantle public education. I am not saying labor action isn't the solution. But it's definitely more complicated than striking when they're willing to cease employing you altogether and let the system die.
Is getting sent to detention no longer a thing?
Kinda.
We're talking about students who are well past detention, and generally supported, or ignored, by their parents when it comes to this behavior. Should you try to RPC/Suspend them, then the parents fight it, and the school backs down.
As I remember it from high school, there was a room where kids were sent, and they were sent immediately. I don't remember if they stayed late. Someone has to watch them, but it seems like it solves the immediate problem when someone is disrupting the classroom?
And if they don't go? Or if the room is full? I've literally seen all of this and more, and some students who just have their parents come in and scream that "how dare their kid be sent" so they aren't.
We had In-School Suspension back in the day that did this. A classroom dedicated to the assholes that didn't have the courtesy to drop out. If the class got full, they'd take over the auditorium.
Foist them in there with a private security guard and a handful of kindergarden-level workbooks. Maybe put up a nice poster "You're doing this to yourself."
That's the "In School Suspension" room. At my old school, those kids could do whatever the hell they wanted in there as long as they were quiet. Most just had headphones in and sat on their phones all day. It's not a punishment, it's a reward.
Back when I was a kid we didn’t have these phones, so that’s one thing that changed. Sitting in a room quietly was a lot more boring for most kids.
Exactly. Sending them to ISS used to be an actual punishment, now its a reward. Even if you didn't do your work back in the day, you just sat quietly bored out of your mind. Now they sit quietly and just scroll, which is what they would be doing in their free time anyway.
And if they refuse to go?
I'm out of touch. What do schools do about direct disobedience?
Nothing. That's the problem. Somewhat like the political spectrum, there was a lot of "well the kid would never do that" or "the parents would stop them at that point" going on. For various reasons, there's large swaths of kids now who just do not give a fuck, their parents can't or won't give a fuck, and the school just shrugs their shoulders and puts it on the teacher to "improve their classroom management" or some nonsense like that.
I’m wondering what other countries do, and what changed in the US? It wasn’t always like this, I don’t think?
Also, it seems like there should be a constituency among parents that would support leadership to put in place better discipline? Why does democracy not work here?
It was not always like this, but parents cared more about their kids behavior and schools were more willing to stand behind their faculty.
And arguably, democracy is working. The parents don't want to watch their kids, and they don't think they're doing anything wrong.
I mentioned in another comment that the democratic (electoral) process that controls education enables parents and their children to be the consumers of education as a product and influence its production.
There really ought to be appointed officials who are relatively insulated from politics who wield power to enforce long-term educational objectives that are in the long-term interests of parents and their children, much like how the FDA acts in the interests of consumers who are unable to watch their own interests when it comes to food and drugs.
I've also mentioned in a controversial comment on another thread that there ought to be parenting classes. The parents who don't care or, maybe worse, think that they're helping their children by enabling their poor behavior or school performance—they don't want their children to get left behind by their peers and feel bad, etc.—in the short term are unable to foresee the long-term consequences: their children come out of the school system dumb and socially maladjusted with little to offer to our society and an advanced knowledge economy, perhaps destined for a lifetime of crap jobs or the prison-industrial complex.
Perhaps schools should offer these parents a Child Future Simulator, where you plug in the child's academic and behavioral record, show their remaining K-12 school trajectory sans intervention, and then show their probabilistic futures, to help them better connect the dots between their short-term enabling and the long-term consequences.
I'd be +1 for free parenting classes. However, I'm betting the venn diagram overlap between "will attend a voluntary parenting class" and "doesn't need a parenting class" is fairly large.
Part of the problem is a lot of parenting problems stem from poverty....hard to be involved with your kids life if you see them maybe 2 hours a day because you're working two jobs to make ends meet.
And the other major problems stem from people who wouldn't listen even if the class is mandatory. I blame ego-driven culture.
I'm betting the venn diagram of "screams at teachers for disciplining their student" and "doesn't tip delivery drivers" is practically a circle. And they would spend the entire parenting class mansplaining to the teacher how good of a parent they are.
How do you know it’s what they want? Parents do individually advocate for their own kids and sometimes in harmful ways, but I’m wondering if a majority of parents would feel this way about the system if they understood what’s going on?
I’d guess this varies by school system, though.
Because I've seen, lived, and worked in these environments? There is a disturbing trend towards having children be unaccountable because that would be "wrong" or "mean" or imply that they aren't perfect.
Sorry about that, I had meant to ask more about what you know and it came off as doubting you. What have you seen?
Just slews of parents and admin ignoring the behavior of children who are clearly out of line? Just about every single problem child i've dealt with has an "IEP" which is an individualized education plan, or sadly, a blank check to behave terribly.
It's supposed to be for children with very legit problems, but is disturbingly overused to excuse just about any behavior, and to give the admin something to hide behind as to why they can't do anything. The parents fight to get their kid and IEP, they fail the grade, the school lets them graduate anyways.
The simple truth is that everyone, except the teachers and other classmates, gets what they want.
The parents get to drop their kid off and forget about them until school is over, and don't have to hear about how their kid is causing issues.
The admin gets to not see their stats dive because they'll straight up fudge grades to make sure enough kids graduate (the number of children in middle school who can't READ but are in normal classes with an IEP is disturbing).
All it costs is anyone else's ability to learn in class.
Neither of these is going to be politically popular (telling parents “Yes, you shouldn’t have as much influence on your child’s education” or “No, little Johnny isn’t actually ready to graduate high school, they can’t do basic algebra or read above a fourth grade level” aren’t exactly winning messages).
There’s also the reality that the best students tend to have a good home life. So making it so students are happier outside of school would likely go a long way, but the government has less control over that and it would likely be very expensive.
This is why I stopped subbing and decided not to pursue a master's in ed.
Relevant opinion piece from today:
This looks flashy at first glance, but the conditions that the author buries in the article make it a complete non-starter:
I work 180 school days a year. If I get rid of my summer, my number of work days goes to 240, which is a 33% increase. The article notes that the median salary for teachers in the US is ~$66,000. If we raise that by 33% to match the increased work year, then the median teacher would be making $88,000. This means that the author is effectively advocating a $12,000 or ~14% raise. While this is certainly nothing to sneeze at, it's not nearly as radical as the author is proposing. It doesn't even come close to matching pay gap identified from the think tanks quoted in the opinion piece (emphasis mine):
This proposal also sidesteps the issue identified in the original article: burnout. We already get two months off for summer and yet we are taking more days off of work and leaving the profession. Taking away summer from teachers would almost certainly accelerate burnout and result in even fewer teachers staying in the career. Summer is the biggest perk we have in our jobs. I consider it an actual payment for me in the form of a "time bonus". I can say, quite confidently, that if my job became year-round, I would simply leave the field.
The second condition the author proposes isn't quite as significant as the first one, but I feel obligated to mention it:
Awful teachers certainly do exist and certainly do erode the morale of other teachers and effect negative outcomes for students, but the "they're too hard to fire!" sentiment is a canard. Firing bad teachers is genuinely possible but relies on administrators doing their jobs adequately and following proper process. Many of them don't do this for a variety of reasons (at best they're as overworked as us teachers; at worst they're negligent or actively protect the bad teachers), but regardless of whether or not they do, getting rid of bad teachers simply isn't a solution when we are experiencing widespread teacher shortages. Many administrators will begrudgingly keep bad teachers on simply because there is no one to replace them.
On a final note, the whole "good teacher" versus "bad teacher" dichotomy that the author puts forth here is yet another misdirection from the bygone NCLB era of American education that really needs to be put to bed for good. Yes, there are some genuinely awful teachers who should not be in classrooms. There are, however, far more fundamentally "good" teachers who are overworked, undersupported, and spread too thin. This makes them functionally "bad" teachers not because of anything innate to their specific character or skillset but because the systemic factors in place that should be supporting their practices are absent.
Let's also not discount the incredible infrastructure improvements that year-round school would require. In many areas classrooms don't have air conditioning because they aren't used in the summer.
That should be the starting salary in a low-income area for teachers.
In areas like where I live, $100K would still be tough to get by on, and many teachers at the top of the pay bracket don't get that if they've been teaching less than 30 years.
Pay them like they're FAANG engineers.
Given the enormous tech industry layoffs in recent years, maybe not the most stable idea… it looks like it was never sustainable in the first place…
You'll have to try very hard to convince me that education ISN'T bring dismantled and degraded on purpose.
As George Carlin once said, "They want you smart enough to push a button, but not smart enough to ask questions".
... And this is ignoring the parenting side of everything. I'm VERY firm in my (also very unpopular) belief that some people have no business having or raising kids.
I'm not sure. Corporate America wants reliable, educated workers. American education culture is all about questioning authority, compared to European and especially Asian education cultures. We're also failing to educate many students to even push a button.
I think the 'dismantling' of education is just an emergent process, resulting from:
edit:
On this point, we do see that certain communities that do value education have good academic results, exceeding expectations even when adjusted for income: Jewish, Chinese, Indian, Nigerian, etc.
I recently caught up with a friend who's trying out substitute teaching in the Bay Area. He's Jewish, and he recounted how some students have straight up told him that they're not going to respect him because he's white. He's not going to stick with it. The pay is meh, and the children suck.
I see a lot of it boiling down to:
Together it gives teaching the impression of being a financially and emotionally unrewarding as a profession. There's a part of me that wants to teach children — but I also met this one teacher from Stockton who walked with a cane because her students had pushed her down the stairs twice; she told me to avoid teaching at all costs.
I think the underfunding and under-supporting of education and our teachers will have major ramifications down the road. Half of California students don't meet state standards for language; for math, that's two-thirds not meeting standards. How are these kids going to make it in an increasingly competitive, knowledge-intensive world? (My guess is they're not.)
This article is pretty accurately describing the situation I've seen here in Canada too.
I've seen it from several sides - coming from a family with a teacher father, becoming a teacher and then a principal myself, and now having a son who is also a teacher.
The main thing I believe that causes teachers to give up in the classroom, call in sick, start asking for extra days off is... a lack of respect.
I don't know anyone who went into this profession for the pay, but there are a few who will admit that the long holidays were a big draw. But that perk wears thin if teacher's don't find they're being respected in the classroom. Part of that comes down to their own classroom management skills, but a lot of it is the calibre of students in the school and the overall tone being set by the administration. If a teacher feels that admin has their back and that if push comes to shove the parents will respect their choices and discipline in the classroom, they will put up with a lot of flak from even the most unruly kids. But if that backing evaporates or its just so inconsistent that a teacher never knows if they're going to be supported or hung out to dry, it breaks their spirit and elevates stress to make teaching such a chore that its hard to continue. Over time, that dark cloud will kill even the best teacher's love for teaching - I've seen more than one teacher in tears and ready to pack it in after being verbally abused by students who were completely out of line, even vicious.
Honestly, salaried teacher pay here isn't bad - teachers make around 100k by their 10th year, but substitute teacher pay is still a bit weak at $224 a day which is about 40k if you only subbed all year. Higher sub pay would definitely help. But even more would be running a school where students and parents give teachers the respect and support they deserve.
In contrast to the wild Gr. 9 boys I used to have to corral when teaching a lesson, another family member teaches some 18 yr old south Asian students who have only been in Canada for a few months. Some of them actually stand up out of respect when she enters the classroom. Last week she had a student touch her foot before their one on one conversation - in India it's a sign of respect for an elder. I'm not saying Canadian students should learn to do that, but I'd settle for learning not to swear at a teacher or openly defying them in the classroom and learning to put their phones away and listen when given instruction is a more than reasonable minimum.
Yea that 100k should be inside of like 3 years. I managed that as a DBA fresh out of college with just a Bachelors.
Last I checked most teaching jobs require a Masters, and is an exponentially harder job.
I had to learn SQL and read documentation, which is annoying but not hard. A Kindergarden teacher needs to wrangle 20+ 5-6 year olds. I can't even wrangle 6 without having a mental breakdown.
Teachers should be right up there with doctors in terms of pay, but for some reason we don't do that, even though with no teachers there'd be no doctors.
I'm a teacher, and you'd have to pay me significantly more to sub than you do to be in the classroom with the same kids and same routines every day.
I subbed for a school year about 7 years ago. Never again. The kids were fine, and some of them were even interns I had over the summer and knew me! It was the damn parents and admins being disruptive during the day that got to me. Why in the world are parents texting and calling their kids in the middle of the school day, or randomly popping in to drop off their lunch or a forgotten item? What happened to kids waiting between periods to run to the office to pick up their dropped off book?
I mean, an upside to the increased security is that, at least at my kid's school, is that unless fully vetted to help in a classroom that day, or a special event, nobody makes it past the airlocked doors, even for a pickup or dropoff.
I agree that's a nice upside.
Substitute teaching should be like jury duty. Everyone gets put into a pool and substitute teachers should get drawn out of a hat like jurors do. If the public saw what schools are like, things would be changed real quick.
/s I'm only partially kidding about this...
I'm not so sure this wouldn't be a bad idea, honestly. The exam required to be a substitute teacher in California is laughably easy. I passed it without studying, and I am famously horrible at exams. But I also had classroom experience before the exam, having been a preschool teacher, camp counselor to specialty camps and a dance teacher.
I personally think that if you're a parent, you should be required to do some continuing education while your child is in school.
I like the idea of subbing being akin to jury duty, where people of all walks of life are required to spend time in the classroom. It would be good for the students and the adults in the world to see people of different ethnicities, religions, abilities, and careers to learn more about them, and see people as people, and adults can see what the schools are like in their area. Obviously, not everyone is cut out to be in a classroom, but those people will have to have exemptions.
Perhaps the people who can't cut it as a substitute would be required to donate in other ways for the extra duties teachers are roped into. Like working the ticket line at the basketball game, etc.
True! Or janitorial or something.
Mirror, for those hit by the paywall:
https://archive.is/LofFf