To think teaching should be one of the highest paid jobs?

[donutque]

Not a teacher, but my logic seems sound.

I’ve seen plenty of threads / comments on here that question if teachers are really that underpaid (often quoting 28k as a starting salary) which seems like a strange race to the bottom.

I work in finance and wouldn’t take a job for a low salary, I’m in my twenties and I’m compensated well. I believe I deserve that, I name my price when I go for jobs and won’t accept lower. This is because I’m 1) qualified 2) have a skill and the market demands me, I am in short supply.

I can see a response I may get is that
teachers, whilst good, aren’t necessarily the most intelligent or talented / high quality individuals. But IS IT ANY WONDER?! The top talent graduates and gets sucked in by the big 4 / investment banks / magic circle all because of money (I promise you that it is rare that a child just bloody loves debits and credits, has a passion for selling stock, or checking the bank statement matches the p&l) Of course, some top grads go into teaching but this is usually because of their personality type (desire to give back / do good / love of children). It’s not the common occurrence. They certainly aren’t doing it for the big pay off.

So if teachers started on, let’s say, £30k but upon qualifying were paid £50k, with a teacher with 5-10 years service being on 60/70/80/90k (no extra responsibility), I guarantee applications would be flooded. Teaching would be a career that is attractive. You’d have the best teachers, which is important. Not just for basic education but teachers are what gets your little offspring into university to become the next doctor, lawyer, politician, plumber, accountant and so on. Teachers are LITERALLY the backbone of society.

Scandi countries document well how education leads to greater GDP, and a basic understanding of economics will explain why paying teachers well is far more beneficial to the economy than anyone who says “but how do we afford it?!”

so, AIBU to think teaching should be one of the highest paid jobs?

Agreed

(Not a teacher either)

Yeah, but... market forces
Unfortunately jobs aren't paid according to their benefit to society, but supply and demand

As long as enough people are still willing to teach, the supply is there.

Agree. My six figure salary and love of learning can largely be attributed to the number of dedicated and inspirational teachers I've been lucky to have. (state school educated).

Better pay, higher standards and improve working conditions and we'll have a more educated and richer economy.

It’s just such an unattractive job now. I was a teacher and had tlr. I would
hate to have to go back to it, I’ve got young children so been out about 5 years. I was secondary, and the behaviour was so awful, work life was just full of conflict. Management just won’t see it, they can’t see a problem, but honestly it’s horrible and really wears you down.

Where's the money coming for this OP? Not being sarky - genuinely wondering what the solution is?

Completely agree.

Applications might be flooded, but retention may not be much better than it is at the moment, or full of bored dispirited people who can't afford to leave and do something else, which is far from ideal.

I think that sone of that ‘salary’ money would be better put into

• reducing class sizes
• creating new SEN schools
• specialist SEN support snd advice
• pastoral and learning support staff
• buildings and equipment
• children’s mental health services
• family support in social services

In other words, that amount of money pouring into education would be fabulous - but would be of most use balanced between salaries and things that address the ‘conditions’ as well.

I agree.

But working only 195 days a year (yes, I know all about the extra hours put in), and a pension scheme to die for, they aren'g too badly. It's the conditions that need reforming.

Where will the money come from to raise their pay? I think the government is doing a poor job at explaining that our taxes would greatly increased. How do we feel about that?

You seem to be assuming that "top talent" for finance and teaching is the same thing. Personally, I doubt they are. But I am in neither field, so can't give specifics.

I am in engineering, and started at the 30k mark you mention after uni. I still wouldn't have applied to be a teacher because i don't think I'd be good at or enjoy ot because of the skill set required.

I also think that "top talent" is usually kids that work well under the current status quo teaching/exam factory set up and that having only those as teachers risks leaving the kids that don't behind. I'd be more in favour of teachers with multiple approaches and thought processes to take the maximum number of kids with them.

I think a culture change and giving teachers breathing room to teach and not burn out is much more important than simply salary.

Well, of course it should be. Spend any amount of time on here and you'll see massive aspiration for kids to do well academically, go to university/other training and get good jobs. Teachers are needed for that to happen. Same at unis - where junior staff are on zero hours contracts with lots of casualisation. But everyone wants to employ skilled graduates.

I think they don't get paid well because it's seen as public spending (= collectively expensive). Which is mad when we give pensioners a 10% raise but refuse to pay people who are actually working more. Maybe it needs to be seen as public investment in an essential service.

But also money would need to be put into measures, as suggested above, that reduce the admin workload.

Scandi countries document well how education leads to greater GDP, and a basic understanding of economics will explain why paying teachers well is far more beneficial to the economy than anyone who says “but how do we afford it?!”

Norway here - September 2022
Norway's government has ended the teachers' strike and forced unions and the Norwegian Association of Local and Regional Authorities (KS) to a compulsory wage board.
"Unfortunately, the parties have not found a solution to the conflict. The strike is now leading to serious societal consequences for children and young people. I am particularly concerned about the pupils' education, vulnerable children and young people and their mental health. After an overall assessment, I have therefore proposed a compulsory wage board," Labour and Inclusion Minister Marte Mjøs Persen said in a statement.
Teachers decided to strike in June over wage growth in recent years. Unions said teachers had been the wage losers of collective bargaining agreements between KS and the public sector for the last six years.
KS maintained throughout the strike that it did not have the funds available that teachers were demanding. Around 8,500 teachers were on strike before the government brought industrial action to an end.
Over the past few weeks, several organisations called on the government to end the strike in the interest of students' well-being.
Typically, strikes aren't referred to the compulsory wage board in Norway unless there is a threat to public health.
https://www.thelocal.no/20220928/norwegian-government-forces-teachers-strike-to-an-end

I think this depends on a few things.

1. Salaries are low because historically teaching hasn’t, and in many ways still doesn’t, attract the best talent outside of some universities. When teaching becomes a profession that attracts the same type of people who might go into investment banking / medicine then salaries will naturally increase.
2. Teaching could attract these people later on in their career by paying higher salaries but due to the need for low salaries the preference seems to be on recruiting completely unqualified or newly qualified teachers within state school. It perpetuates point one.

In STEM historically there’s always been a belief that people who can’t code / build / do the work end up in teaching. It’s part of the reason why stem teaching in state schools is so poor. But in more academic subjects the gap between professions / practice and teaching (particulary in higher and further education) is fairly narrow.

LittleMG ·
'It’s just such an unattractive job now. I was a teacher and had tlr. I would
hate to have to go back to it, I’ve got young children so been out about 5 years. I was secondary, and the behaviour was so awful, my work life was just full of conflict. Management just won’t see it, they can’t see a problem, but honestly, it’s horrible and really wears you down.'

Exactly this! Management kept applying the wrong remedies to the behaviour, which just wasted teachers' time and effort. "Perhaps behaviour would be better if teachers wrote twelve-page lesson plans instead of six."

Teachers might be contracted to work only 200 days per year but each one of those could be 12 - 15 hours in length.

In addition, teachers' time has no value to management so if it loads another tasks on staff, they just have to make time.

I left teaching and along with many of my peers who did the same, the money wasn’t the main issue. It was the constant expectation to work all hours & deal unsupported with children who were disruptive & had no interest in learning, along with threatening parents etc. I could go on. Money isn’t the main issue for retention in my view.

Yes this!

Surely they know what the salary is before they apply for the job. Should I pay more tax from my lower paid job to give them more money? Not everyone is adequately compensated for the job they do - that’s life. And heaven forbid we mention their second to none holidays.

“Mallory, education is the silver bullet. Education is everything. We don't need little changes, we need gigantic, monumental changes. Schools should be palaces. The competition for the best teachers should be fierce. They should be making six-figure salaries. Schools should be incredibly expensive for government and absolutely free of charge to its citizens, just like national defense. That's my position. I just haven't figured out how to do it yet.”

Sam Seaborn, The West Wing

Your assumption is flawed as it assumes teaching is all about the money and you would wish to attract folks who would only do it for the money. In many cases that person won’t be the best teacher

I also find offence in uou saying teachers aren’t the brightest etc, how deeply offensive, generally they are taught their subjects and how to reach well. And I’m not a teacher.

I get what you're saying. I left teaching more than a decade ago because of all the targets and box ticking. But where is the money coming from? The taxpayer is not an endless pot. Maybe if we had tighter rein on how taxes are spent there might be enough to pay better salaries without raising taxes. Look how much is spent on consultants for teacher training days. In my experience they were totally pointless and a waste of money and that's going on in schools up and down the country

Another pitched thread about this, a day before the Local Elections. 🤔

OP, do you really 'wonder' and are you having a laugh, the most 'intelligent' and 'talented' people work in Law or Finance! Yes, if only schools could attract potential lawyers and accountants to become teachers, instead of the dregs they currently attract, ultimately the country would be a lot more prosperous as obviously education is just about output. 😒

@Wenfy I’m sure if you tried a little harder you could be a little bit more patronising! Go on, I know you want to 😄🙄.