Teacher Shortage? Self-Imposed?

[DGS49]

I fear that there is more than one elephant in the room when discussing the critical national shortage of teachers (the mythical shortage of teachers?), but here is a big one:

Teachers typically RETIRE in their early 50's. Most Americans retire in their late 60's. There would be a shortage of EVERYTHING if everyone retired at such a young age. Teachers decline to participate in the last 25% of their working lives. Or rather, they are paid and incentivized to not-work for the last 25% of what would be a normal career.

The reason, we are told, is "burnout." Teachers just cannot be expected to work to 66 and beyond because the work is just too demanding, emotionally. OK. It would certainly be so for me.

But how about this? What if teachers were given a sabbatical year after every six years of employment, when they would get, say, 70% of their full pay to work on some project of their own devising, related to either teaching or to their area(s) of expertise? Then they could be expected to work until the "normal"retirement age, per SS guidelines (full retirement).

If workable, this makes more sense than retirement at 52.

But is it workable?

Let's see...a Sabbatical year at age 29, 36, 43, 50, 57, and 63...retire at 66. Works for me!

 

[ABikerSailor]

Join the military. Not only do you get food, clothing and a place to live, but all national holidays off, 30 days paid vacation per year (and you can sell up to 60 days of that leave you earned per career), as well as the fact that you can retire after only 20 years with a pension and health care for the rest of your life.

Joining the military and serving a full career (over 20 years) is much better than any job out there.

 

[JGalt]

I fear that there is more than one elephant in the room when discussing the critical national shortage of teachers (the mythical shortage of teachers?), but here is a big one:

Teachers typically RETIRE in their early 50's. Most Americans retire in their late 60's. There would be a shortage of EVERYTHING if everyone retired at such a young age. Teachers decline to participate in the last 25% of their working lives. Or rather, they are paid and incentivized to not-work for the last 25% of what would be a normal career.

The reason, we are told, is "burnout." Teachers just cannot be expected to work to 66 and beyond because the work is just too demanding, emotionally. OK. It would certainly be so for me.

But how about this? What if teachers were given a sabbatical year after every six years of employment, when they would get, say, 70% of their full pay to work on some project of their own devising, related to either teaching or to their area(s) of expertise? Then they could be expected to work until the "normal"retirement age, per SS guidelines (full retirement).

If workable, this makes more sense than retirement at 52.

But is it workable?

Let's see...a Sabbatical year at age 29, 36, 43, 50, 57, and 63...retire at 66. Works for me!

Over 4 million people dropped out of the labor force during the Great Resignation. I would guess a large portion of those were teachers.

 

[Concerned American]

I fear that there is more than one elephant in the room when discussing the critical national shortage of teachers (the mythical shortage of teachers?), but here is a big one:

Teachers typically RETIRE in their early 50's. Most Americans retire in their late 60's. There would be a shortage of EVERYTHING if everyone retired at such a young age. Teachers decline to participate in the last 25% of their working lives. Or rather, they are paid and incentivized to not-work for the last 25% of what would be a normal career.

The reason, we are told, is "burnout." Teachers just cannot be expected to work to 66 and beyond because the work is just too demanding, emotionally. OK. It would certainly be so for me.

But how about this? What if teachers were given a sabbatical year after every six years of employment, when they would get, say, 70% of their full pay to work on some project of their own devising, related to either teaching or to their area(s) of expertise? Then they could be expected to work until the "normal"retirement age, per SS guidelines (full retirement).

If workable, this makes more sense than retirement at 52.

But is it workable?

Let's see...a Sabbatical year at age 29, 36, 43, 50, 57, and 63...retire at 66. Works for me!

According to Moneywise, most teachers retire at 59. My wife, a teacher for 35 years, retired at 59. LOL, it didn't have anything to do with burnout. It had to do with my retirement. She said if I retired, she was going too. When Should a Teacher Retire?

 

[initforme]

I fear that there is more than one elephant in the room when discussing the critical national shortage of teachers (the mythical shortage of teachers?), but here is a big one:

Teachers typically RETIRE in their early 50's. Most Americans retire in their late 60's. There would be a shortage of EVERYTHING if everyone retired at such a young age. Teachers decline to participate in the last 25% of their working lives. Or rather, they are paid and incentivized to not-work for the last 25% of what would be a normal career.

The reason, we are told, is "burnout." Teachers just cannot be expected to work to 66 and beyond because the work is just too demanding, emotionally. OK. It would certainly be so for me.

But how about this? What if teachers were given a sabbatical year after every six years of employment, when they would get, say, 70% of their full pay to work on some project of their own devising, related to either teaching or to their area(s) of expertise? Then they could be expected to work until the "normal"retirement age, per SS guidelines (full retirement).

If workable, this makes more sense than retirement at 52.

But is it workable?

Let's see...a Sabbatical year at age 29, 36, 43, 50, 57, and 63...retire at 66. Works for me!

There is no labor shortage. And, the more people that retire before 60 helps the nation.

 

[San Souci]

Over 4 million people dropped out of the labor force during the Great Resignation. I would guess a large portion of those were teachers.

Maybe they did not want to teach Children about Fagism and Draggers.

 

[themirrorthief]

Maybe they did not want to teach Children about Fagism and Draggers.

soon only queers will be allowed to teach

 

[San Souci]

soon only queers will be allowed to teach

Seems like.

 

[ABikerSailor]

According to Moneywise, most teachers retire at 59. My wife, a teacher for 35 years, retired at 59. LOL, it didn't have anything to do with burnout. It had to do with my retirement. She said if I retired, she was going too. When Should a Teacher Retire?

There is no labor shortage. And, the more people that retire before 60 helps the nation.

I retired from the military at 38 with a pension and healthcare for the rest of my natural.

Yeah................I did consider becoming a teacher when I was younger, but decided against it as I didn't want to incur college debt. Summers off sounded like a good thing though. But, I suppose if I wanted another career, there's still time (but I really enjoy being able to have my time be my own.)

 

[SweetSue92]

I fear that there is more than one elephant in the room when discussing the critical national shortage of teachers (the mythical shortage of teachers?), but here is a big one:

Teachers typically RETIRE in their early 50's. Most Americans retire in their late 60's. There would be a shortage of EVERYTHING if everyone retired at such a young age. Teachers decline to participate in the last 25% of their working lives. Or rather, they are paid and incentivized to not-work for the last 25% of what would be a normal career.

The reason, we are told, is "burnout." Teachers just cannot be expected to work to 66 and beyond because the work is just too demanding, emotionally. OK. It would certainly be so for me.

But how about this? What if teachers were given a sabbatical year after every six years of employment, when they would get, say, 70% of their full pay to work on some project of their own devising, related to either teaching or to their area(s) of expertise? Then they could be expected to work until the "normal"retirement age, per SS guidelines (full retirement).

If workable, this makes more sense than retirement at 52.

But is it workable?

Let's see...a Sabbatical year at age 29, 36, 43, 50, 57, and 63...retire at 66. Works for me!

I commend you for this out of the box thinking, etc. We NEED these ideas in education if we are to thrive...or at this point, survive.

This is a solid idea, but I would propose sabbaticals that start spaced out and get closer. Say, first sabbatical after year age 32, which would, in most cases, be around 9-10 years of teaching. Then another at age 40. Then, age 47, 53, 58, 63.

Many more proposals like this are needed. For one thing, in a flexible work world, we have very little. Sure, we have 10 weeks off in summer, two weeks at Christmas, etc. But on a workday, I report to work at 7:45, have an hour lunch, and cannot leave until almost 4:00. Many drs, dentists, etc don't even take appts anymore after 4 PM.

And to prepare for a single day off takes at least 90 minutes, but usually more like two hours. To prepare for a substitute teacher. I hear a trend among younger teachers is they just don't do it. They don't write sub plans; they say they're not paid for the time and won't do it. Part of me is thinking---well, maybe this is overdue, after all.

Again thanks for this...good topic of conversation.

 

[SweetSue92]

I retired from the military at 38 with a pension and healthcare for the rest of my natural.

Yeah................I did consider becoming a teacher when I was younger, but decided against it as I didn't want to incur college debt. Summers off sounded like a good thing though. But, I suppose if I wanted another career, there's still time (but I really enjoy being able to have my time be my own.)

When I was a very young, excited teacher (I loved teaching then and still do), the summers off didn't feel as necessary as they do now. As it is, we get 10 weeks. My husband gets almost this now in the corporate world.

At any rate, teaching is demanding and if you eliminated the time off no one would do it for long.

 

[Ralph Norton]

I retired from the military at 38 with a pension and healthcare for the rest of my natural.

Yeah................I did consider becoming a teacher when I was younger, but decided against it as I didn't want to incur college debt. Summers off sounded like a good thing though. But, I suppose if I wanted another career, there's still time (but I really enjoy being able to have my time be my own.)

Is your service pension enough to live on?

 

[ABikerSailor]

Is your service pension enough to live on?

Actually, yeah. Now, while I won't be living in a large 4 bedroom house with 3 bathrooms and driving a new car every year, I do have enough from my pension to keep food in my belly, a roof over my head, and can pay my utilities and phone bill with enough left over for extras like a smartphone and internet, as well as can put away a few dollars every month for stuff like rainy days and vacations.

I like that my time is my own and I don't have to answer to anyone, but, I actually am considering going back to work, not because I need the cash, but rather because it's nice to interact with people once in a while, and not everyone has the luxury of not working, so it can get a bit lonesome during normal working hours since everyone else is at work.

 

[ABikerSailor]

I commend you for this out of the box thinking, etc. We NEED these ideas in education if we are to thrive...or at this point, survive.

This is a solid idea, but I would propose sabbaticals that start spaced out and get closer. Say, first sabbatical after year age 32, which would, in most cases, be around 9-10 years of teaching. Then another at age 40. Then, age 47, 53, 58, 63.

Many more proposals like this are needed. For one thing, in a flexible work world, we have very little. Sure, we have 10 weeks off in summer, two weeks at Christmas, etc. But on a workday, I report to work at 7:45, have an hour lunch, and cannot leave until almost 4:00. Many drs, dentists, etc don't even take appts anymore after 4 PM.

And to prepare for a single day off takes at least 90 minutes, but usually more like two hours. To prepare for a substitute teacher. I hear a trend among younger teachers is they just don't do it. They don't write sub plans; they say they're not paid for the time and won't do it. Part of me is thinking---well, maybe this is overdue, after all.

Again thanks for this...good topic of conversation.

In the Navy, muster for quarters was at 0700, we got anywhere from 30 min to an hour for lunch (depended on the workload and the command), and we didn't get off work until 1600 (4:00).

Then, there was the duty rotation, where you stayed onboard the ship or had watches on the base every few days, and finally, the deployment schedule where you were away from the US and family for 6 months to a year and a half.

But, we can retire after 20 years of service, and stay longer up to 30 years (the longer you stay, the bigger percentage for retirement) if qualified.

 

[initforme]

Our teachers here are constantly being recruited by the private sector or by other districts for higher pay and sign on bonuses. There's incentive to teach right there. Times have changed.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

I fear that there is more than one elephant in the room when discussing the critical national shortage of teachers (the mythical shortage of teachers?), but here is a big one:

Teachers typically RETIRE in their early 50's. Most Americans retire in their late 60's. There would be a shortage of EVERYTHING if everyone retired at such a young age. Teachers decline to participate in the last 25% of their working lives. Or rather, they are paid and incentivized to not-work for the last 25% of what would be a normal career.

The reason, we are told, is "burnout." Teachers just cannot be expected to work to 66 and beyond because the work is just too demanding, emotionally. OK. It would certainly be so for me.

But how about this? What if teachers were given a sabbatical year after every six years of employment, when they would get, say, 70% of their full pay to work on some project of their own devising, related to either teaching or to their area(s) of expertise? Then they could be expected to work until the "normal"retirement age, per SS guidelines (full retirement).

If workable, this makes more sense than retirement at 52.

But is it workable?

Let's see...a Sabbatical year at age 29, 36, 43, 50, 57, and 63...retire at 66. Works for me!

We lost 17 full time teachers at the beginning of this school year, something like 35 since 2020.
Early retirements and job changes being the largest factor.
We made TV news at the first school board meeting where 16 of the 17 teachers all turned in their resignation at the same time publicly. All complaining primarily of the changing curriculum that centers around social justice and leftist ideology.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

There is no labor shortage. And, the more people that retire before 60 helps the nation.

Then lower the SS retirement age.
You want a massive opening of full time jobs?
Be a burden to SSA? Not if they would reinstate Reagans tightening of disability requirements that led to over 1,000,000 people losing their monthly windfall where they should be working.
Give that money to 1,000,000 people between 60 and 62.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Teachers have been shown that, for the most part, they want to be paid well. They just aren't interested very much in teaching.

 

[SweetSue92]

In the Navy, muster for quarters was at 0700, we got anywhere from 30 min to an hour for lunch (depended on the workload and the command), and we didn't get off work until 1600 (4:00).

Then, there was the duty rotation, where you stayed onboard the ship or had watches on the base every few days, and finally, the deployment schedule where you were away from the US and family for 6 months to a year and a half.

But, we can retire after 20 years of service, and stay longer up to 30 years (the longer you stay, the bigger percentage for retirement) if qualified.

Sure, I get all of that. But didn't you get health and dental care on site? Did you have to do that on your off time or was it considered part of being in the military, and they took care of these needs during your work day?

These seem like small things but it you have to weigh pros and cons. As you say, the military is grueling but you can retire in 20 years. Teaching is also grueling, but it's rewarding. On the pro side, you get 10 weeks off in summer. And in a lot of places, really poor pay, declining benefits and retirement, and about zero respect.

Which is why almost no one is going into it.

 

[SweetSue92]

We lost 17 full time teachers at the beginning of this school year, something like 35 since 2020.
Early retirements and job changes being the largest factor.
We made TV news at the first school board meeting where 16 of the 17 teachers all turned in their resignation at the same time publicly. All complaining primarily of the changing curriculum that centers around social justice and leftist ideology.

For the first time in my memory, we had a young teacher quit just before Christmas. No health issues, no life issues. She just couldn't hack it anymore and she was out.