30 replies to this topic

[Szeven]

Also, there has been a lot of new research in recent years about early childhood education, literacy skills, etc. I don't think it is accurate to suggest that elementary teachers do not need to do professional development or study the latest research in their field.

It would be interesting to see statistics on how many K-7 teachers have any idea or understanding whatsoever of the latest research in their field. Of course there would be some who are trendsetters and others who care nothing other than mandated paid CE credits. But, in the middle of the curve, does the average teacher develop and evolve that much?

[sdwright.vic]

I have a background in Early Childhood Education, and while I am not practising right now, I am required to maintain 40 hours of professional development per renewal period to keep my license.

Also studies show the most important learning period for a child is the pre-k to 5th grade period. Children are much more receptive to broad educational concepts during this period. One of the reason this is prime time for starting something like French immersion. Language is not so developed of an ideal that it is set in stone.

To get a good start, I used to teach letter and number recognition, concepts in addition and subtraction, basic printing skills, basic concepts in what if, what for, basic problem solving and more. A lot for a four year old to take in, but they are a lot more willing to learn. Remember, by the time a child leaves elementary, the can read, write, add, subtract, multiple divide. Every part of education after that is using these basic foundations and building upon them.

[14 West]

I think K-7 teachers are a lot more than babysitters. Grade One, for example, is one of the most critical years in a child's life. It is the year they learn to read. The responsibility held by a Grade One teacher is pretty significant. Also, there has been a lot of new research in recent years about early childhood education, literacy skills, etc. I don't think it is accurate to suggest that elementary teachers do not need to do professional development or study the latest research in their field.

You are missing what I am saying. If you are teaching grade 3 you don't need to know the latest and greatest breakthroughs in your profession because you are not going to teach that. You are teaching a much more basic level of curriculum. This is not to say you are not going to be up-to-date with the latest in terms of teaching methodologies or related disciplines, just not in their specialty area because it isn't terrible pertinent (especially true in a more static science like math, physics or chemistry where my parents text books were probably the same as mine, or even kids nowadays). So in essence K-12 teachers go to University and get a major in something where they learn things far above what they will ever be required to teach, they then have very little incentive to keep current with that information because they will never teach to that level. The skilled biology teacher might have been a C- or an A+ student in their undergrad degree and even the lower performer is still more than capable of handling up to high school bio (safe assumption since they were accepted to a university so probably had a A in high school bio themselves), their true talent and skill is in the ability to communicate the basic curriculum to their students. This of course has very little to do with their university education since you complete 4 years of generic undergraduate education to one year of teaching. Again, I don't want to devalue those teaching skills from K-12, just illustrate they are different and to me does not give them a reason to be making $10k-$20k more than someone with roughly the same education.

Going out on a tangent - Given that passing high school biology would seem to give you the necessary knowledge to teach it (provided you had teaching ability), the current system seems like a whole lot of misdirected education - a teacher might be better to spend 4 years learning to teach, and one year brushing up on the subjects they are going to teach rather than the other way around.

[Matt R.]

I know about three hundred university students or grads who can't wash a dish, boil water or pick up after themselves.

Maybe we should have paid their elementary teachers a little more.


Matt.

[rjag]

Ok enough bashing elementary teachers please! My wife is a grade 2 teacher, she has her Masters of Arts Degree and is known and sought after throughout the Province as a Literacy specialist. She also authors and audits books sold by Scholastic.

This woman could run circles around your posts here....to steal a quote from Game of Thrones "You know nothing...."

She goes to work at 7AM and doesn't get home till after 5PM most days. She probably puts in at least another 10 hours per week at home prepping and marking.....she gives her kids tests and scores them....she fails kids....they come into her class illiterate and leave being able to read and write....she had lots of opportunities to teach at cushy schools but chose inner city as that's where the needs are greatest. My wife doesn't need to Teach but chooses to Teach.

She doesn't argue about the wages, in fact most of her teacher friends agree that they are paid well but all of them also agree that the system has failed the kids by removing of resources whether its librarians, music teachers, school nurses, even the fact she has a pc with a 17" CRT with XP as the OS. Her budget for the whole year is $100 to buy books and resources, she spends $1000-$1500 of her own money to keep your kid up to speed with new material and doesn't begrudge one bit of it.

I ask her why she does it and she smiles and says "its the kids stupid!"

Perhaps some of you as parents have failed your kids by not taking the time to be a .....parent.

'nuff said.

[14 West]

Kudos to her! I'm not trying to take anything away from Elementary teachers or other teachers, all I am trying to say, is that for another position in Public Service that requires the same amount of education, the same amount of hours per year, and the same amount of skill, intelligence and tact (notice I said amount of Skills not the SAME skills) - Teachers make $10-20k more depending on tenure and the district. Teachers were also able to negotiate an automatic significant wage increase after they earn a graduate degree, something other public servants don't enjoy. Whether or not you agree the added education makes the employee a better employee is irrelevant of course because you either do or don't in both cases, but only one case gets the extra pay. Teachers don't get paid too much, but the broader professional public service has been left behind. Just take a look at what the typical Engineer/Biologist/Geologist/Geoscientist/Forester makes in non-management roles.

[tedward]

I'm not trying to take anything away from Elementary teachers or other teachers...

Actually you are clearly trying to "take away" by comparing apples and oranges and engaging in a war of anecdotes.

The difference in salaries under discussion is not outrageous nor, despite insinuations to the contrary, inexplicable.

[14 West]

Actually you are clearly trying to "take away" by comparing apples and oranges and engaging in a war of anecdotes.

The difference in salaries under discussion is not outrageous nor, despite insinuations to the contrary, inexplicable.

Ok, if I follow you down that path since apples can't compare to oranges, seems the only fair way to compare them are the necessary qualifications. The fact is the main reason why teachers, firemen, doctors, nurses, dentists etc.. have been able to buck the trend of REAL declining or stagnant incomes over the last 20 years is because they have people by the balls. It is far easier to bargain from a position of, "IF you don't pay me your house will burn down; your kid will be illiterate; your teeth could fall out; etc..." than a more abstract, "Local fish populations will be put in jeopardy; the Culvert in that logging road may not be designed properly; etc..." Neither side of the coin says anything about how difficult or even how critical the job is, but it sure grabs you by the neck if the already well compensated Doc says pay him half a million or he is walking out the door, far more than if your average public servant asks for a decent middle class income.

Again, not trying to suggest that the more moderately paid examples (teachers, fireman etc..) should be paid less, it's just pathetic that we only consider the gut reaction/knee jerk response type bargaining positions and ignore those who also contribute to the success of our day to day lives.

[VicHockeyFan]

Here's the Vancouver Sun's database of 70,000 or so government (municipal and provincial) employees that make over $75,000 per year.

You only need put in the last name.

http://www.vancouver...ries/basic.html

[Matt R.]

Logging road culvert vs my house burning down? Guess which one is more valuable.

Matt.

[14 West]

Logging road culvert vs my house burning down? Guess which one is more valuable.

Matt.

Isn't that the Irony. How many truckloads of logs and the jobs associated with it passing over that culvert do you think your house is worth? Maybe 5 days worth? Maybe less? Probably more like a few hours worth.

Likewise if no one is there to study climate/weather/you name it, and the world goes to sh_t, seems to me that is FAR more valuable than a house where by the time the fire department shows up is mostly burned to the ground anyways. Which of course is somewhat ironic on it's own, how many structure fires have you seen lately where the building was salvageable vs. how many did they show up just to put out the what was left? Chances are putting it out isn't quite the emergency as you'd been lead to be believe from the stories of heroic rescues, more typically by the time they arrive it is already a total loss and everyone is either out already, or gone. But again, my point is everyone adds value in their own way, just some are more easily able to make a dramatic case for it, and thus have an improved bargaining position.

In most lines of work people expect to make less in BC or specifically Vancouver or Victoria because of supply and demand, lots of people want to be here, competition is hot, and therefore people are willing to work for less. Yet our doctors make more than many other jurisdictions and yet are always yammering on in the media about they need to continue to see pay raises or else they will take off to godforsaken places like Alberta, or Saskatchewan. So let me get this straight, the average person will accept less to live here, but Doctors need to make more or else they will take off. Hmmm, something doesn't add up here, but again its that bargaining position that they have and the average employee doing a "less important" job does not have. It's not really about logic at all.