Should Teachers get paid more?

[Joel James]

On 7/9/2017 at 8:48 AM, Buck Turgidson said:

As for government mandated education, would you really entrust the government with your child's education? I tutor my kids every night for 1-2 hours (they are 6 and 8), and am selective of the schools they attend. When they are a little older, I will put them in private school - not because I am Mr. Moneybags, but because my children's education is more important to me than eating.

First of all, its is good to hear that you do as such. That takes time and commitment, as well as much patience. 

However, the issue is that not everyone has parents that have the ability or time to do the tutoring. I'm part of a first generation immigrant family, and while my mother had time to teach me the basics of english, much was left to the public education system since my parents both worked night shifts and later my dad was working 6 days a week, and was exhausted by the time he got home late. 

Not every family can afford a private education, and it isn't the difference between eating and not eating--it can be the difference between having a roof over your head or not, or holding down a job or not. And while you might take this as an insult, anecdotal evidence is not evidence at all. Generalizing your own experience to that of an entire population is rarely ever accurate. 

[ComradeMilton]

I hope you know what you're doing with the subjects needing to be taught. Half the reason teachers teach certain things is related to which topic they're qualified to teach.

[Caecus]

On 7/9/2017 at 6:48 AM, Buck Turgidson said:

As a person who has moved from a successful career in the private sector to teaching, I can tell you that teaching does not pay as well. Only an idiot goes into teaching for the money. If you don't feel a vocational desire to teach, you should do something else. All things being equal, it's not hard to replace teachers, and the whole concept of tenure is a joke that only benefits them and fails students.

Good teachers are hard to find only because the system, unions, tenure...etc ensures that the chaff remains.

The problem is the culture of entitlement in academia - it is common for teachers to think that they do the most important job on earth. In a free market economy, all evidence suggests otherwise, and teachers are paid accordingly.

As for government mandated education, would you really entrust the government with your child's education? I tutor my kids every night for 1-2 hours (they are 6 and 8), and am selective of the schools they attend. When they are a little older, I will put them in private school - not because I am Mr. Moneybags, but because my children's education is more important to me than eating.

Perhaps a broad-spectrum pay raise is an oversimplified answer to a rather complex problem. Granted, I still think that you could attract more competent individuals in general, but without having a system in place to remove the "chaff," I suppose the problem would continue to persist. The inconsistency with how some school districts (down to even some schools themselves) are of higher quality than others is rather disturbing, particularly if it is divided along racial or socio-economic lines. 

As a moderate conservative who recognizes (and dealt with) the inefficiencies of government sponsored programs, I still nonetheless have to disagree with you on public education. Historically speaking, public education and literacy have gone up in democracies where the franchise was expanded. 19th Century Britain, and the United States after the Great War are great examples of when the franchise was expanded and it necessitated better public education. If every person in this country gets the same voting power (If, being the operative word), then it is critical that public education has some level of a base-line for there to be an informed public debate. 

That being said, is public education without critical flaws? Heavens no, and I would never suggest such a thing. But I nonetheless believe that state-sponsored education, in some form, is inherently democratic and important to the Republic at large. 

[Frank Todd]

I am heavily surprised this is still going.

 

Good on you guys

[Buck Turgidson]

On 7/10/2017 at 5:04 PM, Joel James said:

First of all, its is good to hear that you do as such. That takes time and commitment, as well as much patience. 

However, the issue is that not everyone has parents that have the ability or time to do the tutoring. I'm part of a first generation immigrant family, and while my mother had time to teach me the basics of english, much was left to the public education system since my parents both worked night shifts and later my dad was working 6 days a week, and was exhausted by the time he got home late. 

Not every family can afford a private education, and it isn't the difference between eating and not eating--it can be the difference between having a roof over your head or not, or holding down a job or not. And while you might take this as an insult, anecdotal evidence is not evidence at all. Generalizing your own experience to that of an entire population is rarely ever accurate. 

Good points Joel. As a North American, I am descended of immigrants as well - 7th generation Irish on one side, 4th generation Lebanese on the other. I think the importance of education has a major cultural component - for example, from the looks of it, the Irish side of my family does not give a fig for schooling, whereas the Lebanese side did. Where the Irish had every opportunity (being white at a time when that basically meant a free pass in life), the Lebanese side did not.

If I may, I will share another anecdote that may blow your mind: Both of my grant parents on my father's side were born in Canada, and were the first to be so. When they were 1 and half, there was a plague of diphtheria, and they both wound up deaf and dumb. As a result, they were consigned to boarding schools and became basically wards of the state, where they met, and married not long after finishing school (Arab treatment of the disabled is pretty well universally horrific, which  can confirm after having lived in the Middle East for 7 years - they basically represent an embarrassment in Arab culture and are almost never seen in public, often disowned by families as my grandparents were). My grandfather was a concierge at a pulp and paper factory, and my grandmother was considered unemployable, having been subject not only to her disability, but also a Catholic girl's education. They raised 5 kids together in abject poverty - my father was the eldest, contracted polio, and was in hospital for malnutrition at the age of 9. Basically about as bad as you can get in Canada at the time. Something of the Lebanese culture remained in them, however, which was the importance of education, which they did not have the means to provide. Instead, they instilled in their kids the desire to learn - somehow this was lost on my Dad's siblings, possibly due to their natural gifts and the unique circumstances of their situation. My father won scholarships, aided by his Aunt who reconnected with the family later in life. He got a degree, and went on to become CEO of a company of 13,000 employees at the end of his career. Honest to Science, this is the truth.

My point is that they could not even teach him English or French - my father did not speak a word of any verbal language until he was 7 years old. His parents, in their dire situation, did what they could to ignite a fire in their kids, and succeeded beyond their wildest dreams for one, and utterly failed the other four. I can see by how you write that your parents were successful in doing the same, and the rest is up to you. They probably gave you a great example of a strong work ethic too.

I was not generalizing my own experience, just pointing out my order of priorities, and now you understand why I feel this way. BTW In October, I will start teaching an adult education program for 2 days a week whose students are 95% immigrants.

On 7/10/2017 at 8:57 PM, ComradeMilton said:

I hope you know what you're doing with the subjects needing to be taught. Half the reason teachers teach certain things is related to which topic they're qualified to teach.

Funny question. More often than not, those who level the criticism of qualifications don't know what it takes to do a given job. I don't think I am 'qualified' in the traditional sense, and I will tell you why and let you brand me how you like:

 

The job in a nutshell:

- I teach business acumen (negotiation skills, market analysis, sales processes, tactical and strategic decision-making, marketing, finance...etc)

- I do so at one of the top second tier universities in Europe (it has been around for over 800 years)

- My lectures and simulations are part of their MBA program, and include a complex simulation, so nothing is scripted - students do funny things and you need to read it on the spot.

- Soon I will teach at an adult education program for the same in Canada, and continue the above program as well (some scheduling issues, but doable).

 

My 'qualifications'

- Bachelor's in History, with a major in classics.

- GPA 2.1 - it took me 10 years to finish what should have taken me 5 years. I point to this when it comes up as a finely tuned effort to get a degree with minimum effort, because I was learning what I really needed to on the job. Then I show them my references, and ask if multi-tasking is important in today's market.

- I failed the same math class 4 times in high school, and every year from beginning to end. My Mom always says I loved math so much, I went 12 months a year.

- I have worked nearly full time since I was 16

- I have done a lot of drugs. A lot. I'm surprised you kids have any left. Honestly, it should be a qualification.

 

How did I get to lecture at this level?

- I learn on my own, and have a passion for culture and languages. I can communicate in 6 languages, 4 of which are spoken today, and one that is not spoken (sign language). I once conducted a negotiation with a person who only spoke Urdu (not one of my languages), and am convinced that having learned sign language gave me superpowers in terms of reading body language - we worked with a contract translated in English and Urdu, and spoke about 20 words to each other in 1 hour.

- I love to travel, and move for work - you can always find interesting work if you are willing to move. I have lived on 3 continents so far.

- I read a lot. Really a lot. I only did a History degree because that's what I was into at the time, so I could pull it off without too much work while I worked full time. I keep up on current events, follow many sources, from many different angles, and trust my own counsel.

- As a result, I have been a very successful salesperson, and a strategic one - I have been in the right place at the right time more than once, and it was deliberate each time. I started my consultative sales career selling artwork and sculpture, then graduated to electrical and plumbing supplies, enterprise systems, networking components, supply chain, and until a few years ago I taught tire sales people how to sell. During Y2K I worked for one of the best ERP outfits around, during Gulf War 2 and Afghanistan, I got into supply chain (I was having a lot of fun with Industry Giant at the time, and saw the opportunity...). I sold the ERP system to a country that governs 6% of the world's oil supply, and have sold products and services in over 30 countries to date. On 3 occasions in my career, my entire department was shut down, and I was the only one retained - due to performance, not connections.

- My references are stellar. I have a reputation for hard & smart work, honesty, candor, curiosity, humor, erudition, and most importantly pragmatism. Also humility lol. I am also known for going to the outer edge of customer expectations (and I really don't understand why so few do since this is how you differentiate) - a customer of mine had an issue, so I learned Javascript and built the solution for him even though I didn't sell that product. 

- I have literally never let school get in the way of a good education (thank you Mr. Clements)

- Based on the above (especially the references), they let me do a single class, and deal was sealed. They showed me the deck 2 hours before the class started, and I had to lecture for 1.5 hour. Yes I have the gift for gab, but also a real world grasp of words that other people don't understand and can't explain.

 

So, tell me who you would prefer as your teacher, the above with all my faults (you have no idea how much I LOVE drugs), and who has acquired a unique spectrum of experience in many areas, complimented by a hard working ethic (and play hard - did I mention the drugs? I can't remember), insatiable curiosity (at 45 years old I still don't really know what I want to do with my life), exploration, and real-world experience all over the world; or someone who is qualified on paper, but whose erudition comes at the expense of so much else that life and ambition have to offer? I mean, I can't tell you how good it feels to tell those MBA students that I only have a Bachelor's in Arts, and History no less.

School never served me well, largely because I am sort of un-coachable, but I think it is important as hell, and count my blessings every day for even having finished high school.

Holy cow that was long. Re-reading it quickly, I am not sure I would believe it if I were on your end, but whatever - it's the truth and I have no reason to lie here.

[Buck Turgidson]

On 7/12/2017 at 5:55 AM, Frank Todd said:

I am heavily surprised this is still going.

 

Good on you guys

There. I killed it.

[Frank Todd]

Just now, Buck Turgidson said:

There. I killed it.

How do you figure? This could just pick up within the next few days (and us ignoramus's would be ignored lol)

[Buck Turgidson]

Sure now that you replied and broke my spell. Now I have to come up with another disturbingly long wall of text.

[Caecus]

On 7/13/2017 at 1:02 PM, Buck Turgidson said:

My 'qualifications'

- Bachelor's in History, with a major in classics.

- GPA 2.1 - it took me 10 years to finish what should have taken me 5 years. I point to this when it comes up as a finely tuned effort to get a degree with minimum effort, because I was learning what I really needed to on the job. Then I show them my references, and ask if multi-tasking is important in today's market.

- I failed the same math class 4 times in high school, and every year from beginning to end. My Mom always says I loved math so much, I went 12 months a year.

- I have worked nearly full time since I was 16

- I have done a lot of drugs. A lot. I'm surprised you kids have any left. Honestly, it should be a qualification.

#historymajorsftw

An extremely interesting subject that is a worthy addition to any scholarly pursuit, but unfortunately does not provide a lot of job opportunities in the US outside of research or teaching. Ironically enough, I ended up in business with a history degree too, though by pure chance. I'm a clinic manager and property developer now, though admittedly, history doesn't teach you about building codes, taxes, or god-damned insurance claims.

Took 2 years of Latin though, for my second language. Salve. Unfortunately, real estate doesn't provide a lot of opportunities to practice. 

[ComradeMilton]

12 hours ago, Caecus said:

#historymajorsftw

An extremely interesting subject that is a worthy addition to any scholarly pursuit, but unfortunately does not provide a lot of job opportunities in the US outside of research or teaching. Ironically enough, I ended up in business with a history degree too, though by pure chance. I'm a clinic manager and property developer now, though admittedly, history doesn't teach you about building codes, taxes, or god-damned insurance claims.

Took 2 years of Latin though, for my second language. Salve. Unfortunately, real estate doesn't provide a lot of opportunities to practice. 

Ha, we have pretty similar jobs. Anyway, as in non-profits, charities and so forth you'll often notice large salaries. The reason for this is just foras in an entirely private company you receive the quality you pay for. If Doctors Without Borders needs to pay its leader a rather large salary it balances out nicely due to having a much better qualified person doing fundraising, in turn making the charity net more cash for operations. If you want a private school experience you're going to generally be taught by people who hold Master's degrees in their fields. Again, you get what you pay for. If you go to public school you'll often be taught by a teacher with a bachelor's degree in teaching and a concentration in their field. Quality costs.

Edited July 18, 2017 by ComradeMilton

[Buck Turgidson]

14 hours ago, Caecus said:

#historymajorsftw

An extremely interesting subject that is a worthy addition to any scholarly pursuit, but unfortunately does not provide a lot of job opportunities in the US outside of research or teaching. Ironically enough, I ended up in business with a history degree too, though by pure chance. I'm a clinic manager and property developer now, though admittedly, history doesn't teach you about building codes, taxes, or god-damned insurance claims.

Took 2 years of Latin though, for my second language. Salve. Unfortunately, real estate doesn't provide a lot of opportunities to practice. 

correction - Minor in Classics

Well, History is one of the only disciplines that teaches people about time, and how things and ideas evolve. It is mostly based on case studies, and touches on everything from science, to art, to politics, engineering, business, innovations...etc. IMO History is the ultimate in liberal arts, and produces well-rounded generalists, which are in very short supply (either you have people are schooled but specialized, or unschooled, but know stuff but can't prove it). It makes sense that it does not connect to any direct career path except teaching - teaching history is the punishment for thinking it's just another specialization...The trap many of them fall into is thinking that they kniw everything, rather than allowing it to provoke more questions. History is the ultimate discipline for students of the human condition.

That case-study approach, and holistic view of events engages your analytical side pragmatically - you are not limited to numbers like engineers or -isms like philosophy majors. It includes the important human equation and sufficient familarity with concepts to out them in practice without resorting to incomprehensible gibberish. It gives you enough to know the opening move in most situations, and tools to learn what you need after that - in my case, major 'career' changes have been relatively easy, which is how I acquired the unique experience I have. And as a History major, I am sure you understand how much I love sticking it to MBAs in the academic and corporate world that they just got served by a History Bacchelor...

Building codes, taxes...etc are skills - you don't need a degree to learn those. Even if you have a degree, you will need to learn them when the need arises. I am abput to launch a product of my own design on 3 continents, supplied from China and Estonia, and sold in NA, EU, and Australia - I have had to learn a lot about taxes, supplementing customs regulations I already learned, as well as design and production planning. Your currency in those subjects matters a lot, but a History education prepares you in 2 ways: ypu know how to learn and analyze quickly, and you are not afraid to because you are accustomed to learning the unfamiliar.

I did 3 years of classical Latin in university (having dodged 5 years of Church Latin under the Jesuits, in favour of, you guessed it, Spanish). I used to joke that it would be useful for when I deal with Roman customers, but as it turned  oit, it has been incredibly useful - i understand Romanian as a result, and can easily read Italian as well. When I studied it, the internet didn't exist, but as soon as it was a thing, the benefit increased exponentially. Combined with fluency in French (Latin once the Germans got through with it), German (had to sack the Roman Empire to learn their cases), and Spanish, I can now easily pick up human or computer languages. Languages are algebra for arts students. I feel very bad for mono-linguists, especially for those who limit their understanding of the world to a small number of sources only in their mother tongue. I regret not learning Mandarin yet, and will get a tutor for myself and my boys.

4 hours ago, ComradeMilton said:

Ha, we have pretty similar jobs. Anyway, as in non-profits, charities and so forth you'll often notice large salaries. The reason for this is just foras in an entirely private company you receive the quality you pay for. If Doctors Without Borders needs to pay its leader a rather large salary it balances out nicely due to having a much better qualified person doing fundraising, in turn making the charity net more cash for operations. If you want a private school experience you're going to generally be taught by people who hold Master's degrees in their fields. Again, you get what you pay for. If you go to public school you'll often be taught by a teacher with a bachelor's degree in teaching and a concentration in their field. Quality costs.

Someone with a Master's degree in their field and who is now teaching, was probably not very good in their field. To be a teacher, you need only be good at teaching. I got plucked into academia because an alumni of the school attended an event I ran in the corporate world, and being a significant contributor to the school, vouched and insisted that I be assessed. His specific message to the school was to bring real-world pragmatism and experience into the classroom, and reduce impractical academic content. He hires graduates, and though they test very well, their effectiveness has dropped in the last few years. The way he put it to the school was that they continue to teach the same way they have for 800 years, but the academic challenge has changed. They are Milennials, who think that a piece of paper qualifies them to be president of the company on day 1, know a lot of facts because they grew up with the internet, and have no judgement because they grew up with the internet.

In case you're wondering what quality costs, I make 1000EUR a day in academia, and 2600/day in the private sector.

So, am I qualified?

[ComradeMilton]

 

15 hours ago, Buck Turgidson said:

Building codes, taxes...etc are skills - you don't need a degree to learn those. You may not think so, but at least as within an MPA you absolutely need a degree to do it. It's not a simple tasks you learn over time to do. It's how to do so. Example: in my state if your so much as touch cash collected by the office removing two $10s from the cash and leaving a $20 is already embezzlement. In enacting new taxes (which was my concentration) There's tons of things you can do, many different structures, how to prepare a budget to ensure you net what you need and the council can still claim a reduction in funding. All kinds of stuff like that.

I did 3 years of classical Latin in university (having dodged 5 years of Church Latin under the Jesuits, in favour of, you guessed it, Spanish). I used to joke that it would be useful for when I deal with Roman customers, but as it turned  oit, it has been incredibly useful - i understand Romanian as a result, and can easily read Italian as well. When I studied it, the internet didn't exist, but as soon as it was a thing, the benefit increased exponentially. Combined with fluency in French (Latin once the Germans got through with it), German (had to sack the Roman Empire to learn their cases), and Spanish, I can now easily pick up human or computer languages. Languages are algebra for arts students. I feel very bad for mono-linguists, especially for those who limit their understanding of the world to a small number of sources only in their mother tongue. I regret not learning Mandarin yet, and will get a tutor for myself and my boys.

Someone with a Master's degree in their field and who is now teaching, was probably not very good in their field. The ones who do this are intending to teach at private schools, they're not going for research or a position with a university. To be a teacher, you need only be good at teaching. I got plucked into academia because an alumni of the school attended an event I ran in the corporate world, and being a significant contributor to the school, vouched and insisted that I be assessed. His specific message to the school was to bring real-world pragmatism and experience into the classroom, and reduce impractical academic content. He hires graduates, and though they test very well, their effectiveness has dropped in the last few years. The way he put it to the school was that they continue to teach the same way they have for 800 years, but the academic challenge has changed. They are Milennials, who think that a piece of paper qualifies them to be president of the company on day 1, know a lot of facts because they grew up with the internet, and have no judgement because they grew up with the internet.

In case you're wondering what quality costs, I make 1000EUR a day in academia, and 2600/day in the private sector. I think I missed where you said what you did. I don't know, to be honest. I'd need to pull EU financial data to even have a useful opinion.

 

Also we all seem to have (at least) begun as history majors (mine changed) and learn Latin. Which is kind of neat.

[Buck Turgidson]

On 7/19/2017 at 3:36 AM, ComradeMilton said:

 

 

Also we all seem to have (at least) begun as history majors (mine changed) and learn Latin. Which is kind of neat.

Haha yeah - seems to be the qualification for being an opinionated lout on a game forum! Lol we should run for president!

[Caecus]

 

I saw this and thought you guys would appreciate this. 

[Dubayoo]

On 12/6/2016 at 6:56 PM, Frank Todd said:

So many people will argue that Teachers get an adequate salary. Now I know there are a handful of people out there who would say that we do get paid "just the right amount" or that Education is adequately funded now and days, but if you were to ask a teacher anywhere... They will tell you otherwise.

 

So what do you think? Do teachers get paid enough, or are they just complaining over nothing?

According to the centrist Brookings Institute, they get paid too much: https://www.brookings.edu/blog/future-development/2017/07/21/teachers-salaries-too-many-bucks-for-the-bang/

Teaching is a passion.  You don't get better at it because you're paid more, and you won't get worse at it because you're paid less.  The motive comes from seeing how students develop into becoming successful in life. 

The real problem is the absence of discipline in schools that allows students to run amok such that they distract passionate study habits from developing.

[ComradeMilton]

1 hour ago, Dubayoo said:

According to the centrist (Uh, your problem begins here) Brookings Institute, they get paid too much: https://www.brookings.edu/blog/future-development/2017/07/21/teachers-salaries-too-many-bucks-for-the-bang/

Teaching is a passion.  You don't get better at it because you're paid more(If you want high quality teachers you have to pay them competitively. If you prefer the lowest cost possible the resultant students will demonstrate the difference. It's also why most of the best teachers are in private schools making much, much more than in public..,(If you desire good teachers you're basically going to have to pay more for their quality or they'll decline your offer in favor of another. This is standard public sector stuff. Want to know why non-profits often spend hundreds to millions to their leadership and wondered why? Because when you pay enough to attract quality leadership it brings in massively increased revenue due to their talents. If you want a charity constantly begging for money in public because you thought hiring an expensive team was silly this is where you learn of your mistake.)    The motive comes from seeing how studentos develop into becoming successful in life It may for some, but that's not going to replace a salary.

The real problem is the absence of discipline in schools that allows students to run amok such that they distract passionate study habits from developing. Well, you're basically not allowed to do anything in punishment except detention, in-school suspension, suspension, or expulsion. If you think everyone's bad at this and want to give it a shot (and make yourself liable for civil lawsuits to accompany the pitiful salaries we offer teachers it's hardly surprising why there may be discipline issues in some schools. Once again, you get what you pay for.

 

[Dubayoo]

19 hours ago, ComradeMilton said:

 

The study very explicitly points out how competitiveness is not a concern of quality teachers.  The nature of teaching is to be cooperative, not competitive.  It is a labor of love.

It also explicitly points out that the abundance that non-for-profits spend isn't worth it.

Edited July 26, 2017 by Dubayoo

[ComradeMilton]

2 hours ago, Dubayoo said:

The study very explicitly points out how competitiveness is not a concern of quality teachers.  The nature of teaching is to be cooperative, not competitive.  It is a labor of love.

It also explicitly points out that the abundance that non-for-profits spend isn't worth it.

Yes, I noted your conservative think tank arguments that don't seem to actually seem at all interested in citing their claims. Teaching has no nature; becoming a teacher isn't like joining a religion. If you underpay you get the bottom of the teaching pool. If you want quality instruction, at the moment, you'll need to raise compensation to private school levels or foreign schools where the top go to teach.

Not-for-profits wasn't what I said. I said non-profits. There's so much evidence in opposition to your propoganda that it hardly warrants a response. If you'd like to learn what's done versus what you believe feel free to start browsing non-profit leadership and their salaries. I doubt you care enough to find all the data completely, with citations, refutes every claim you've made regarding it. It's reality; it's happening all the time; the Op-Ed you posted not only is in no way binding or correct and is basically just a long opinion from a conservative think tank. It's of no actual use.

Yours in Christ.

[Dubayoo]

Everyone claims the institute belongs to the opposing ideology since it's not identical to themselves.

In reality:

https://web.archive.org/web/20110608074559/http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/polisci/faculty/groseclose/pdfs/MediaBias.pdf

The institute is one of the most centrist think tanks around.

In any case, the institute doesn't say you should underpay.  What it says is teachers are motivated by their desire to see students succeed.  You pay them enough to get by, stay up to date with educational achievements, and remain in touch with the neighborhood they teach within.  Quality teachers are not teaching to become wealthy.  

[ComradeMilton]

Those that I know absolutely are. One teachers languages at a very nice prep school in New York. Another makes $75,000, tax free, housing provided in a country in the Middle East. Lots of teachers go for financial incentives. It's why private schools tend to cost a good deal of money and have much better results than public schools. It's the same with non-profits. If your right-wing center offered evidence or something to accompany the expressed opinion it might be conceivable for part of what it says to be true, but it doesn't and your attempt to speak for the entire teaching profession worldwide on why they teach is pretty silly.

[Dubayoo]

If you're working to become wealthy, there are much better professions to work in beyond teaching.  You're working in the wrong field if that's your goal.

[ComradeMilton]

I don't know if I'd say they're trying to become wealthy. That seems silly. But at least a significant portion of the best quality teachers are definitely going to follow the money.

[Dubayoo]

Eh... if they're following the money, then they're really not sociable enough to be teachers.  Money in itself is something you follow when you're not sure what you want to do with yourself since the opportunities around you aren't satisfying.  You're literally saving up for the future.  Teachers need to be in touch with the opportunities around in order to connect with the neighborhood they're teaching in.  They need to consume in the moment to constantly know who this year's students are.  Likewise, we don't need teachers indulging in tastes that are so refined and expensive that they become out of touch with the abundance of students they're teaching.  Even among advanced students, we need to understand how advanced students often come non-elite backgrounds due to the randomness of human nature.

I mean the point of school is to provide equal opportunity.  Students from elite backgrounds shouldn't be looking to teachers for role models.  They should be networking in the neighborhood itself to get ahead.

Edited July 28, 2017 by Dubayoo

[ComradeMilton]

2 hours ago, Dubayoo said:

Eh... if they're following the money, then they're really not sociable enough to be teachers. Like thought-crime or something? What business is it of either of us what motivates teachers to teach?  Money in itself is something you follow when you're not sure what you want to do with yourself since the opportunities around you aren't satisfying. Where are you getting that, out of curiosity?   You're literally saving up for the future.  Teachers need to be in touch with the opportunities around in order to connect with the neighborhood they're teaching in.  They need to consume in the moment to constantly know who this year's students are.  Likewise, we don't need teachers indulging in tastes that are so refined and expensive that they become out of touch with the abundance of students they're teaching.  Even among advanced students, we need to understand how advanced students often come non-elite backgrounds due to the randomness of human nature. None of this can be changed so I assume you're just going to go with a public school; a perfectly fine choice, IMO, but quality will very likely vary significantly

I mean the point of school is to provide equal opportunity. The point of the public schools, generally, yes.  Students from elite backgrounds shouldn't be looking to teachers for role models.  They should be networking in the neighborhood itself to get ahead. Networking before even entering university? I did the bulk of mine during and after being an undergrad. I can't imagine contacting someone I knew from even high school who I'd count as a useful part of the network, even if we're basically friends.

 

[Dubayoo]

39 minutes ago, ComradeMilton said:

 

It's our business because they provide a social service.  This is not a strictly private affair.  Even in private schools, we need to be concerned with due diligence when it comes to the provision of service towards children.

Networking is not something limited to your college years.  It's a regular part of life with regards to how you get to know people in your neighborhood.  If anything, this is the problem many graduates have today - they started professionally networking while they were in college instead of understanding how the foundations of their relationships come about from how they regularly socialize.