- Nov 5, 2012
- 23,560
- 14,764
- 1,405
So what did the parent's and tax payers get out of this deal? Same teachers. same schools. same results, higher wages. They're just paying more for the same old shit. There's not going to be a rush of better teachers going there. It's the same ones only being paid more.The quality of education depends on more then just teachers. That is one of the issues. The other is if you don’t invest in decent pay you aren’t going to attract or retain good teachers in enough numbers to make a difference, not when you can cross a state line and make a lot more.How low should low be?So? Doesn't everyone in a starting position start low? Why should teachers be any different?Noy
And the average home cost is $150K, so lower pay is justified.
The average salary would get a home around 109,000 and the starting salary a home around 50,000.
How do you expect to recruit and retain quality teachers when they can cross the line into PA and OH and earn 58,000 and 63,000 respectively?
If West Virginia ranks 51 out of 51 or if you use the other link that I posted 47 out of 51 also in Quality Rating they are rated 30th, the quality of the teachers in West Virginia is already chronic, so why would you want to reward bad teachers with a pay rise? IMHO a teachers pay should be related to the quality of the job they are doing, so if the overall Quality rating is 30th then no the teachers shouldn't get a pay rise, whats needed is Performance Related Pay if they are doing a good job they get a pay rise and if they are doing a bad job they get a pay cut to ENCOURAGE them to get with the programme and begin doing a good job and if they consistently fail at improving their performance then they should be fired.
If you were a teacher starting out where would you go?