If anything, a first year teacher should get paid MORE than a 20-year veteran! The first year of teaching is pretty much universally a crying-every-day experience. You are constantly only about one day (if that) ahead of your students, designing your lesson plans on the fly and producing classroom materials at midnight the night before you need them. As my husband's mentor teacher said, "The only cure for the first year is the second year."
Having said that, there are various increased responsibilities (such as mentoring both new hires and student teachers and chairing departments) that come with longer service.
Having been constantly frustrated when I began my education studies last semester, I will be the last person to argue that most education programs are anything more than a joke. HOWEVER, don't berate all teachers because of this, nor assume all education programs are this way. Undergrad education programs are on the outs. Most schools now pretty much require a Masters, and while some Masters programs are fairly easy, many are downright hellish. My husband completed a Masters program that required him to teach all day every day under the guidance of a mentor teacher, then race from school to the University for classes until 9:00 every night. He was expected to keep up as both a teacher and a student in a very challenging and academically rigerous program. His students are constantly amazed at the breadth and depth of his knowlege on a huge array of subjects, from science to history to the arts.
I'm starting a Masters program at the end of the month and I'm sort of saddened by the prospect. I have to get my Masters in Teaching if I'm going to be employable by any public school, when I really would rather get my Masters in History, since that is what I would like to teach (and for that matter teach at a private school). Teaching and learning is interesting and it isn't something that most people can do with no training whatsoever, but I do think that sacrificing content area knowledge for ad nauseum teacher-training is a sure way to dumb down the teacher corps.
But don't poo poo all teachers because our training programs are silly. I know a lot of teachers who are, literally, brilliant. They will also tell you that their training programs were easy and frustrating, but they went through it because they have a desire to educate. Then again, I met a lot of prospective teachers (mostly elementary-level candidates) in my undergrad program who could barely tell their right from their left.
Frankly though, I'm not entirely convinced that Americans want really really smart people teaching. Really really smart people question assumptions and tend to teach kids how to do the same. Smart people don't take anything for granted, rock the boat, innovate, do things differently. It's way easier for the powers that be to handle the populace if they are educated by people who blindly follow rules and do what they're told.
Think about this: Studies have shown that teacher candidates from more selective schools who earned better grades and SAT scores actually have a *harder* time finding employment than their more mediocre counterparts.
Having said that, there are various increased responsibilities (such as mentoring both new hires and student teachers and chairing departments) that come with longer service.
Having been constantly frustrated when I began my education studies last semester, I will be the last person to argue that most education programs are anything more than a joke. HOWEVER, don't berate all teachers because of this, nor assume all education programs are this way. Undergrad education programs are on the outs. Most schools now pretty much require a Masters, and while some Masters programs are fairly easy, many are downright hellish. My husband completed a Masters program that required him to teach all day every day under the guidance of a mentor teacher, then race from school to the University for classes until 9:00 every night. He was expected to keep up as both a teacher and a student in a very challenging and academically rigerous program. His students are constantly amazed at the breadth and depth of his knowlege on a huge array of subjects, from science to history to the arts.
I'm starting a Masters program at the end of the month and I'm sort of saddened by the prospect. I have to get my Masters in Teaching if I'm going to be employable by any public school, when I really would rather get my Masters in History, since that is what I would like to teach (and for that matter teach at a private school). Teaching and learning is interesting and it isn't something that most people can do with no training whatsoever, but I do think that sacrificing content area knowledge for ad nauseum teacher-training is a sure way to dumb down the teacher corps.
But don't poo poo all teachers because our training programs are silly. I know a lot of teachers who are, literally, brilliant. They will also tell you that their training programs were easy and frustrating, but they went through it because they have a desire to educate. Then again, I met a lot of prospective teachers (mostly elementary-level candidates) in my undergrad program who could barely tell their right from their left.
Frankly though, I'm not entirely convinced that Americans want really really smart people teaching. Really really smart people question assumptions and tend to teach kids how to do the same. Smart people don't take anything for granted, rock the boat, innovate, do things differently. It's way easier for the powers that be to handle the populace if they are educated by people who blindly follow rules and do what they're told.
Think about this: Studies have shown that teacher candidates from more selective schools who earned better grades and SAT scores actually have a *harder* time finding employment than their more mediocre counterparts.
Last edited: