Vanquish
Vanquisher of shills
- Aug 14, 2009
- 2,663
- 358
- 98
The whole idea of "we have to know what we can pay before we give you an amount" in the two posts above is poppycock. Sorry, but it is.
I agree that a school has to stay within its budget. No argument there...but you're looking at things backwards. If the value of the work of a teacher is X...and you hire 5 teachers making it 5x to pay them...just because your budget is 4x doesnt mean you reduce what you pay. You up the budget.
I'm not for wild spending or spending "too much"...but if you dont pay teachers a living wage or what they are worth...then you're going to get CRAPPY teachers since you dont pay them what they're worth.
That's been the problem for too long. We're getting bad teachers because they dont get paid enough. And people wont pay more because they see the craptastic teachers we have now. So it's an endless circle of fear and non-payment.
So tell me. How exactly do you pull money out of your ass? I mean clearly thats what you are suggesting people do.
You have budgets for a reason.
Sorry to post from so far back, but I'd forgotten about this one.
I'm not suggesting people pull money out of their ass. I'm saying that you're looking at the problem from the wrong direction. There is more money out there...it's called a) cutting other departments b) cutting waste and 3) taxes (in that order because I'd rather not have more taxes).
Once you realize how much a teacher is worth you pay them that...or your schools are going to suffer. Just crying "we dont have the money" doesn't solve your school problem.
The real key to this whole issue is how teachers are evaluated.