We're #3, We're #3........... in running out of smart people.

[we vs us]

Prison guards have about 240 to 250 work days per year.  Ever been inside a prison?  Not ideal working conditions.  Teachers roughly 180-190.  Teachers also get far better benefits than those of us in the private sector like pension and health insurance.  In order for me to enjoy as good a retirement scenario, I have to do that out of personal savings.  Take all that into account and teachers are paid pretty well.  I suppose we could bring their pay in line with the private sector and take away their pensions and let them save for retirement like the rest of us. 

Look, I'm not hating on teachers, and not picking on your personally.  It's simply not providing an accurate comparison unless you take all these things like actual work days, pension, and paid health insurance into account which are perks their peers don't have.

If you blindly throw more money at education for the sake of throwing money at it, you wind up with more administration and more programs which don't do a thing to better the outcome of the student.


Next...

I hate to bring this up, but . . .

You're a sales guy.  I'm not sure how things are structured for you but one way or another if you hit your goals you can make some serious cabbage.  If you're in upper mgmt -- and I assume you are -- and the company hits its goals you can make even MORE cabbage.  In some cases A TON more cabbage.  In some cases, a 1/3 to a 1/2 of your salary -- again.

I'd also like to point out that, if your company is worth its salt, you'll be given a great opportunity to save for retirement with a matching contribution (401k) and you'll get some sort of healthcare, which the company will pay a good deal towards. 

You paint this rosy picture of teacher bennies and union support system and it just simply doesn't add up to how it works in real life.  I have a feeling you don't hang out with too many of them. 

Signed,

All of my Parents and Parents in Law are Teachers.

[Conan71]

Sorry Conan, but if you think teachers only work when school is in session, you are MAJORLY incorrect. Many teachers go in early and stay late. They take home papers to grade, etc. Teachers work much longer hours than M-F, eight to three, with summers off.

Quite well aware of that.  I have many friends who are teachers and appreciate the work they do.  I'm also quite aware they get many perks those of us in the private sector don't get.  For their pay and hours worked, they are not far off their peers with the same level of degree.

Also consider that many salaried bachelor level positions are more than 40 hours a week.

[Conan71]

I hate to bring this up, but . . .

You're a sales guy.  I'm not sure how things are structured for you but one way or another if you hit your goals you can make some serious cabbage.  If you're in upper mgmt -- and I assume you are -- and the company hits its goals you can make even MORE cabbage.  In some cases A TON more cabbage.  In some cases, a 1/3 to a 1/2 of your salary -- again.

I'd also like to point out that, if your company is worth its salt, you'll be given a great opportunity to save for retirement with a matching contribution (401k) and you'll get some sort of healthcare, which the company will pay a good deal towards.  

You paint this rosy picture of teacher bennies and union support system and it just simply doesn't add up to how it works in real life.  I have a feeling you don't hang out with too many of them.  

Signed,

All of my Parents and Parents in Law are Teachers.

With such a piss poor comparison, I'm surprised you grew up around educators.

I chose sales because of the money I can make in sales, anyone else with the aptitude to sell can do the same and probably even do better.  I'm not comparing myself to a teacher in the first place.  I have a great gig, others have an even better gig.  It's what I chose.  Along with all those great opportunities to earn great cabbage, I also stand to lose.  Ever take a 30% hit in income in a year while staying in the same position or have that sustained for two years?  I have.  During that time, teachers did not.  It's all a part of the game and chosen profession.

I'm making a comparison of average baccalaureate level compensation.  In the private sector, paid health insurance and a fully vested pension are rare as hen's teeth.  Someone earning $50K per year in the private sector does not have it as good as a teacher earning $50K per year.  The private sector worker works 240 days on average, pays a percent of their health care and must save a percent for retirement unless they plan to depend on SSI when they retire.

So, here's the difference in teaching vs. private sector:

Job security for teachers with seniority.  If sales drop in the private sector non-union employees have little protection

Stable pay

Insurance benefits

Vacation time far in excess of the private sector which can also allow them to earn a 2nd income

Relatively well insulated from economic downturns

Pension plan in addition to social security

Teachers compensation isn't the travesty it's made out to be.  That said, I have absolutely ZERO problem with merit-based increases all around.  I'm simply tired of the meme that if we just paid teachers more money our kids would suddenly be smarter.

Signed,

It's not all rosy all the time in Salesville

[Conan71]

I agree 100%.

There are too many school districts. My sister is a school principal in Florida and they have one school district per county. There is probably millions in savings alone just having less superintendents.

By the way, she used to teach in Oklahoma but left for much more pay.

I don't think that just spending more money will solve all the problems. I just know that not spending what the other state's spend is clearly showing lower test scores.

But how do you explain some of the highest spending states (or districts) having such poor test scores then?

I'm not badgering, I'm simply trying to get someone to provide solid evidence that spending above a certain level equals results.

[Red Arrow]

My present employer matches a portion of my 401K savings but not all of it.  Previous employers provided a 401K but did not match any of my savings.

[we vs us]

Lets make having children a right and not a privelege...We could test the potential parents for intelligence if they pass they can have a child....Ya that will work....Or we could just throw money at it.....

I'm very interested in ideas about how to legislate better parenting.  Can we institute, perhaps a weekly check in by an enforcement team for parents who are marginally performing?  What's a good review process, and should it be based around a 3 strikes or you're out template?

Another question I have revolves around my -- as a parent -- responsibility to schedule one hour or two hours nightly for instruction?  Or can I spread it out over a business week (5 days) or a full calendar week (7 days)?  Similarly:  my daughter is only 20 months old; what's the Minimum Allowable Pre-School Instruction Time to guarantee her 1) maximum reading ability by 5 yrs and 2) instill the highest possible CIJ (China-India-Japan) Comparative Math and Science Quotients and still allow me to work 60 hours a week?

I mean seriously.

The allergy to funding anything at a satisfactory level is nearly pathological. It's as if moralizing about the Fall of the American Family has become a substitution for everything else, including working on ways to fix the problem.  If we were at the top of the funding list and still having miserable outcomes, sure, by all means, let's work on efficiencies and consolidation.  Hell, if we were at the middle of the funding list and still have miserable outcomes, let's focus on efficiencies or consolidation.  But there comes a point when we're so miserably behind both in outcomes and in funding that the answer is obvious. 

But really, we're just making very sure of the kind of people who will live here.  We're certainly not saying "dear young professionals:  bring your families and we'll be happy to educate them while you enliven and enrich our state."  You're saying, "we believe in cheaping out on one of the primary drivers of future growth in the global economy, and we aren't afraid to brag about it!"

[Conan71]

Wevus, in light of BB's post, look no further than the social stats of this state if you are still mystified about poor performance.

One of the highest teen pregnancy rates, highest rate of female incarceration just for starters.  That shows a poor attitude in the community toward family and responsibility.  When drugs and sex appear to still be the priorities, spending more and more on education has not worked.  It's pretty safe to say that kids who come up in a home with some sort of moral compass will do far better as a student and citizen.

Spend all you like on education, but for parents who refuse or are incapable of being as responsible and loving as you and Mrs. Wevus are or myself, it's really not going to improve the outcome with the child.  It's next to impossible to force responsibility onto a parent.  Either they have a tendency for it or they don't.

I suspect, like me and my daughter's mother have been, you and your wife will be very involved in your child's education and not leave it all up to the teachers.  And your child will succeed quite well. 

Something else to consider then I will shut up:

The best outcomes spring from better role models at home.  In general the children of professionals and hard-working blue collar workers are going to do better than those raised in homes on public assistance (note, I said in general.  There have been great successes which have come from the ghetto and no not all public assistance is going to "moochers") and coming from parents who have an apathetic outlook on life.  Attract more professionals and high level blue collar/technical jobs, and you will attract better parents, and ergo better students.

I've worked in a variety of occupations in my lifetime which have allowed me to observe and learn a lot about human nature and human behavior.  My theories certainly aren't the end-all but they are from very keen observations on life.

[waterboy]

Wow. Good conversation. I would like to add some "real life" here as well. I'm not as organized debate oriented as you are Conan or as smart and savvy as many of you. However, I have seen a lot of teachers come into our retail store the last few years.

Some are applying for work to try and  make up for the loss in salary after moving here from other states. I get to talk to those privately. Often they are working on a masters because if you don't, there is no way to increase your income. Most are looking for good buys on school supplies. They are using their own money to do so and rarely complain about it. They are the first ones in the store at 7am, and the last ones in the store between 5-8pm. BTW it doesn't seem to matter whether they are public or private school employees, they are all spending out of their own pockets, on their own time. They start the process about mid July to be able to get the best stuff and buy in large quantities to get the lowest prices. Must be a great job eh? I don't remember my nephew having to pay for prisoners supplies when he worked at Moss Correctional Center. Nor would he have done so on his own time. He left because he was truly fearful of becoming as crazy as the inmates.

Conan et. al. I would ask you all this. Why focus on the pay period? Pay them monthly for 12 months if that makes you happier. I doubt that if they held year round class that you would increase their pay, right? After all you feel they are already well paid. That seems to be the biggest red herring of the whole conversation. Do you look at other public professionals the same way? Do firemen, paramedics and policemen have their wages calculated in such a way as to show they are indeed the highest paid, well trained, well educated employees of all? Because they are. They spend large amounts of time ....doing nothing but sitting, lifting weights, listening to music, sleeping and cooking and getting paid for it. Most have second jobs because they have such large amounts of free time with a 24 on 24 off type situation, not because they need the money.

Maybe we should pay them by the fire? Successfully quelled fires please. Police by the domestic disturbance call? Only those that didn't lead to protective notices please. Paramedics by the accident? Only those without fatalities please. That seems ludicrous but when you use the same logic with teaching then it has traction.  So, pay them monthly and require them to teach summer school so that argument goes away.

And why focus on outcomes so heavily? You all admit it has to do more with home environment, which I don't disagree, but why not pay police, fire and paramedics the same way? After all the ones with the best records of life saving and putting out fires should be better compensated shouldn't they? Only we all know that its less likely the new McMansion in Jenks will catch fire than the postwar clapboard house in north Tulsa. Same with murders. Same with cars. So, we pay all these professionals the same and rely on seniority, training and education to justify pay increases. But not teachers? Why are teachers held to such higher standards yet receive lower respect?

Lastly, if you've made it this far, doesn't it seem a little humorous that many of these well articulated, logical, persuasive arguments being made are espoused by folks who seem to think their school, their time period of schooling, and their education was better than average, yet its the same system more or less that we've underfunded for many decades?!

Answer those questions with something other than political rhetoric and we may make some headway.

[Conan71]

Full time work is roughly 240 days per year, taking into account holidays, vacation (if get any) and weekends.  Roughly 22 days per month.

Prison guards get overtime.  Teachers don't.

Plus, your private sector is paying you about 2 1/2 times entry level what a teacher makes with same entry level ed.  So, they get a 25% bonus on "time off" (except that doesn't count the evening hours ALL of them spend working) while you get a 250% increase in pay.  Yeah, they are sure working the system with that one....

And the divide deepens every year.

And averages follow along with that.  1989 average was $22,000.  2010 average is $38772.  That is 1.76 ratio.  76% over that time.  Ok, 76% is magnificently greater that 71%...you got me there.

FYI, national average for a bachelor's degree for 2010 graduates was approximately $47K.  In Tulsa that average is probably less based on how we usually fare nationally on such stats.

Step 0, in TPS for 2009-2010 was $32,900.  I believe this is in line or just above the state minimum.

Unless you are proving the uselessness of public school math, $47K is hardly 2 1/2 times $32,900.

Using those numbers: $47K/240 working days and $32.9K/183 working days, the private sector worker earns $195 per day, plus pays a larger share of their health insurance and funds part or all of their retirement plan.  The teacher earns $179 per day with paid pension, health insurance, disability, life insurance, and dental.  That's a package worth over $500 per month not including pension.

Add that in and the teacher receives a total compensation of $211 per day worked plus pension.  That's $16 more per day than their private sector entry-level bachelor's degree holder.

And yet one more perk: they will credit up to five years military experience on pay scale and calculating retirement.  Definitely something you don't run into in the private sector.

Tulsa Public Schools 2009-2010

Benefits:

11.00/mo dental

Life insurance - 1 1/2 times employee's annual salary

Long Term Disability

Health Ins:

Oklahoma statutes provide that the District shall pay health insurance premiums not to exceed the "Health Choice High" individual premium amount for each teacher (certified) who elects coverage. Teachers not electing to take health insurance through the District (provided other coverage is in force) shall be paid a taxable cash "in-lieu" payment in the amount set by statute. The HCH premium amount to be paid by the District for 2009 is $409.12 per month, for 2010 it will be $442.80 and the "in-lieu" payment amount is $69.71 per month.

Note: The School District's existing agreement provides a career increment in the amount of $1,000.00 after 20, 25, 30, 34, 37 years of creditable service. Beginning with the 1995-96 school year, teachers who complete their 20, 25, 30, and 34 years of service during the first semester will move to the appropriate career increment for the second semester. The salary adjustment will be one-half the amount indicated for the yearly career increment.

A maximum of five years will be granted on the salary schedule for prior active military service.

* Schedule 183 contract days

http://www.tulsaschools.org/depts/hr/cb/payteach.shtm

[Cats Cats Cats]

Ok, so make school year round and pay teachers more? 

[we vs us]

Wow. Good conversation. I would like to add some "real life" here as well. I'm not as organized debate oriented as you are Conan or as smart and savvy as many of you. However, I have seen a lot of teachers come into our retail store the last few years.

Some are applying for work to try and  make up for the loss in salary after moving here from other states. I get to talk to those privately. Often they are working on a masters because if you don't, there is no way to increase your income. Most are looking for good buys on school supplies. They are using their own money to do so and rarely complain about it. They are the first ones in the store at 7am, and the last ones in the store between 5-8pm. BTW it doesn't seem to matter whether they are public or private school employees, they are all spending out of their own pockets, on their own time. They start the process about mid July to be able to get the best stuff and buy in large quantities to get the lowest prices. Must be a great job eh? I don't remember my nephew having to pay for prisoners supplies when he worked at Moss Correctional Center. Nor would he have done so on his own time. He left because he was truly fearful of becoming as crazy as the inmates.

Conan et. al. I would ask you all this. Why focus on the pay period? Pay them monthly for 12 months if that makes you happier. I doubt that if they held year round class that you would increase their pay, right? After all you feel they are already well paid. That seems to be the biggest red herring of the whole conversation. Do you look at other public professionals the same way? Do firemen, paramedics and policemen have their wages calculated in such a way as to show they are indeed the highest paid, well trained, well educated employees of all? Because they are. They spend large amounts of time ....doing nothing but sitting, lifting weights, listening to music, sleeping and cooking and getting paid for it. Most have second jobs because they have such large amounts of free time with a 24 on 24 off type situation, not because they need the money.

Maybe we should pay them by the fire? Successfully quelled fires please. Police by the domestic disturbance call? Only those that didn't lead to protective notices please. Paramedics by the accident? Only those without fatalities please. That seems ludicrous but when you use the same logic with teaching then it has traction.  So, pay them monthly and require them to teach summer school so that argument goes away.

And why focus on outcomes so heavily? You all admit it has to do more with home environment, which I don't disagree, but why not pay police, fire and paramedics the same way? After all the ones with the best records of life saving and putting out fires should be better compensated shouldn't they? Only we all know that its less likely the new McMansion in Jenks will catch fire than the postwar clapboard house in north Tulsa. Same with murders. Same with cars. So, we pay all these professionals the same and rely on seniority, training and education to justify pay increases. But not teachers? Why are teachers held to such higher standards yet receive lower respect?

Lastly, if you've made it this far, doesn't it seem a little humorous that many of these well articulated, logical, persuasive arguments being made are espoused by folks who seem to think their school, their time period of schooling, and their education was better than average, yet its the same system more or less that we've underfunded for many decades?!

Answer those questions with something other than political rhetoric and we may make some headway.

Good stuff.

[Conan71]

Wow. Good conversation. I would like to add some "real life" here as well. I'm not as organized debate oriented as you are Conan or as smart and savvy as many of you. However, I have seen a lot of teachers come into our retail store the last few years.

Some are applying for work to try and  make up for the loss in salary after moving here from other states. I get to talk to those privately. Often they are working on a masters because if you don't, there is no way to increase your income. Most are looking for good buys on school supplies. They are using their own money to do so and rarely complain about it. They are the first ones in the store at 7am, and the last ones in the store between 5-8pm. BTW it doesn't seem to matter whether they are public or private school employees, they are all spending out of their own pockets, on their own time. They start the process about mid July to be able to get the best stuff and buy in large quantities to get the lowest prices. Must be a great job eh? I don't remember my nephew having to pay for prisoners supplies when he worked at Moss Correctional Center. Nor would he have done so on his own time. He left because he was truly fearful of becoming as crazy as the inmates.

Conan et. al. I would ask you all this. Why focus on the pay period? Pay them monthly for 12 months if that makes you happier. I doubt that if they held year round class that you would increase their pay, right? After all you feel they are already well paid. That seems to be the biggest red herring of the whole conversation. Do you look at other public professionals the same way? Do firemen, paramedics and policemen have their wages calculated in such a way as to show they are indeed the highest paid, well trained, well educated employees of all? Because they are. They spend large amounts of time ....doing nothing but sitting, lifting weights, listening to music, sleeping and cooking and getting paid for it. Most have second jobs because they have such large amounts of free time with a 24 on 24 off type situation, not because they need the money.

Maybe we should pay them by the fire? Successfully quelled fires please. Police by the domestic disturbance call? Only those that didn't lead to protective notices please. Paramedics by the accident? Only those without fatalities please. That seems ludicrous but when you use the same logic with teaching then it has traction.  So, pay them monthly and require them to teach summer school so that argument goes away.

And why focus on outcomes so heavily? You all admit it has to do more with home environment, which I don't disagree, but why not pay police, fire and paramedics the same way? After all the ones with the best records of life saving and putting out fires should be better compensated shouldn't they? Only we all know that its less likely the new McMansion in Jenks will catch fire than the postwar clapboard house in north Tulsa. Same with murders. Same with cars. So, we pay all these professionals the same and rely on seniority, training and education to justify pay increases. But not teachers? Why are teachers held to such higher standards yet receive lower respect?

Lastly, if you've made it this far, doesn't it seem a little humorous that many of these well articulated, logical, persuasive arguments being made are espoused by folks who seem to think their school, their time period of schooling, and their education was better than average, yet its the same system more or less that we've underfunded for many decades?!

Answer those questions with something other than political rhetoric and we may make some headway.

That's rather interesting.  I thought teachers weren't moving here because our salaries are lower.  The ones who do move here must have been laid off elsewhere or they are the second income in the family unless there's another family tie which brought them here.  The teachers who tell you they are going for a masters to improve their pay aren't very savvy if they are planning on staying in education.  It results in about a $1600 annual pay raise.  Hardly worth the investment for what would amount to a net difference of about $70 per month.

You entirely miss the point of compensation discussion.  It's been trotted out how poorly teachers are paid vs. their peers with similar education levels and time on the job.  That's a red herring if there ever was one.  It's not a matter of pay period.  It's a matter of days worked when comparing if a teacher is paid close to their peer group.  I just posted with benefits and all calculated in a teacher is paid about $211 per day.  Take out the basic bennies $179 per day (vs. $195/day for their peer group).  Certainly if we go to year round school there should be a commensurate pay raise.  I wouldn't work significantly more hours than I agreed upon for the same money.

As I understand, teachers "contract" with the school system annually.  TPS lists the contracted days as 183 days.  I would assume the contract amount would be adjusted higher for more days of work.

Everyone should be well aware that teachers frequently buy their own school supplies and are un-reimbursed.  I'm also aware of teachers silently paying for children's lunches or bringing food.  Why aren't parents taking responsibility for those costs in the first place and why aren't schools prioritizing funding to make sure all needed supplies are provided by the system?

But to be perfectly clear, not all teachers must buy supplies on their own dime.

And why not focus on outcome unless the issue is we simply want to spend more on education just for the sake of spending more on it?  Does that make good sense?  If that's the real goal and not improving results or demanding better results then that makes it even easier at saying we solved the problem.  I rather like that, give common ed $1bln more a year to spend and we can have the pride in saying we spend more than our peers on education.  We may still have crappy results, but hey, we stepped up and we spend more which makes us feel better.

And finally, "Spend more money on education" is some of the most worn out political rhetoric of all.

[RecycleMichael]

I realize that teacher pay is a small part of the equation of funding for schools. But here is the state comparisons. Remember the average years of experience of teachers in Oklahoma is 15 years.


Average teacher salaries for region

Oklahoma $41,053
Kansas $42,697
Missouri $42,750
Arkansas $43,580
Louisiana $45,090
Colorado $47,030
Texas $49,900
New Mexico $52,523

We are not talking about massive pay increases to get to the regional average. That would amount to a $375 a month pay raise per teacher. If we gave them half that much as a pay raise, we would at least be competitive with Kansas, Missouri, and Arkansas.

[Red Arrow]

And finally, "Spend more money on education" is some of the most worn out political rhetoric of all.

Don't forget "do it for the kids".  Usually has nothing to do with education.

[Red Arrow]

We are not talking about massive pay increases to get to the regional average.

Then why should it make such a huge difference?