Why Smart, Ambitious People Rarely Become Teachers

Discussion in 'Debate & Marathon Threads Archive' started by DigitalDiva25, May 19, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. DigitalDiva25

    DigitalDiva25 Companion

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2011
    Messages:
    137
    Likes Received:
    0
  2.  
  3. czacza

    czacza Multitudinous

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2001
    Messages:
    24,950
    Likes Received:
    2,104

    May 19, 2013

    The thread title annoys me enough...haven't opened link yet.
     
  4. sevenplus

    sevenplus Connoisseur

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2006
    Messages:
    1,640
    Likes Received:
    2

    May 19, 2013

    I don't want to read it, either (but I probably will).
     
  5. TeacherShelly

    TeacherShelly Aficionado

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    Messages:
    3,565
    Likes Received:
    0

    May 19, 2013

    The article premise is that ambitious, smart people want prestige, upward mobility, and good healthy competition. Teaching does not offer those things in the way other professions do, so people who become teachers must be okay not having any of those things.

    Honestly, I stopped looking for work prestige, upward mobility, and competition with my peers when I left the business world and became a teacher. One of the many perks of teaching is that there is not such a rat race. Climbing the ladder, stepping on the backs of colleagues, and showing a professional image all the time - I'm glad to be out of that.
     
  6. DigitalDiva25

    DigitalDiva25 Companion

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2011
    Messages:
    137
    Likes Received:
    0

    May 19, 2013

    Why did you stop looking for those things? Was it because it was too much stress or work?
     
  7. callmebob

    callmebob Enthusiast

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2010
    Messages:
    2,030
    Likes Received:
    6

    May 19, 2013

    Upward mobility is good. Prestige and competition don't interest me. But with upward mobility comes more money. Since that is the main purpose of a job, sounds good to me.
     
  8. giraffe326

    giraffe326 Virtuoso

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2006
    Messages:
    7,075
    Likes Received:
    14

    May 19, 2013

    I didn't read the article, but I was VERY frequently told I was "too smart to be a teacher" throughout high school and college. It would always tick me off- don't we want our smartest people sharing their knowledge with our youth?!
     
  9. Major

    Major Connoisseur

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2005
    Messages:
    1,620
    Likes Received:
    5

    May 19, 2013

    Very nice summary Shelly ........ I scan read the article in about one minute ..... I must confess work prestige, upward (RAPID) mobility, competition (I absolutely thrive on competition) ...... and other things like incredible perks made the "rat race" the only place for me..... Simply put ..... I loved the rat race.

    No doubt we all march to a different drummer and that's OK ....... :):)

    In Henry David Thoreau's words ..... "If a man does not keep pace with his companions, perhaps it is because he hears a different drummer. Let him step to the music which he hears, however measured or far away."
     
  10. TeacherShelly

    TeacherShelly Aficionado

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    Messages:
    3,565
    Likes Received:
    0

    May 19, 2013

    When I was younger, I wanted to be a teacher. I just could not bear the idea of being poor. Mostly, I think I wanted to prove my parents wrong for having little confidence I could succeed. As I gained experience, I stopped needing to prove anything.

    I really don't feel like my job is unprestigious. I'm in a school and a district where parents support teachers and treat us well. I make good money. I continue to learn and grow as an educator and I never feel bored. I'm happy to be out of the competitive, eat-or-be-eaten mentality of the business world. I don't want to be a principal. At. All. So I guess I'm not upwardly mobile, but I'm happy.
     
  11. TeacherShelly

    TeacherShelly Aficionado

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    Messages:
    3,565
    Likes Received:
    0

    May 19, 2013

    @Major, that is an excellent quote. I'm writing that one down.

    Here's one I also like, by Robert Frost. It sums up my love of teaching almost as a treasured hobby:

    But yield who will to their separation,
    My object in living is to unite
    My avocation and my vocation
    As my two eyes make one in sight.
    Only where love and need are one,
    And the work is play for mortal stakes,
    Is the deed ever really done
    For Heaven and the future's sakes.
     
  12. Cerek

    Cerek Aficionado

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2009
    Messages:
    3,094
    Likes Received:
    0

    May 20, 2013

    I read the blog. While I agree with some of the conclusions or statements made, I had a difficult time getting past the author's need to insist (over and over) that his/her conclusions were "simple and obvious". In other words, there is just no way anyone with a working brain could possibly disagree with the conclusions reached.

    To put it succinctly, I disagree.

    I joined a discussion on another forum in which one member kept insisting their view was the only "right" one. The member even said at one point "Come on, you KNOW this is the only right answer. Just admit it." Kind of reminded me of Bob's inability to understand why some people (I would say "most people") don't find the idea of letting the air out of all the bus tires "funny". Point being, if you have to constantly insist your conclusions are obvious and the only logical ones that can be reached, chances they are not that "obvious" (or correct) at all.

    Basically, the author states that "intelligent and motivated people" want five basic things in their jobs: prestige, success, competition, upward mobility, money/compensation.

    Prestige - Actually, the author equates "prestige" with salary level. The more money one makes, the more prestige they supposedly have. I don't agree with that. There are several jobs that carry prestige, but not necessarily high salaries; police, firemen, and other service industries generate a lot of support and respect from others. As another member said, I live in a district where teachers ARE respected and appreciated, so I do feel like teaching carries a certain level of prestige with it in different areas.

    Success - Again, the author defines success as viewed by society, rather than the individual, but insists all individuals view success the same as (s)he. I definitely could not disagree with this more. I've worked several different jobs in my life and I felt I was very good (and successful) at most of them. Ironically, the one job I did NOT do well at (in my opinion) was the one the author would likely have considered the most desirable (based on his/her criteria) - stockbroker.

    Competition - I'll meet the author halfway on this one. Many of the jobs I had came with a certain degree of competition. The stockbroker job definitely had lots of competition because each of us were trying to get clients from the same area, so we were competing with each other for the same client base. Some were very good at it, some not so good and some were conniving and backstabbing. That's the part of competition I don't like. I don't mind competing against others when the field is level, but in every job I've had, I've seen those who "compete" by throwing others under the bus, working to gain special status (based on things OTHER than job performance) and others who just downright "cheated" at the competition. That is not my idea of a good work environment. Sadly, I see the same thing in teaching many times. We all know people (and have many have posted about peers on here) who work harder at being the bosses pet than actually being a good teacher. Or at least work harder at making themselves look good at others expense. So there IS competition in teaching. Even though we receive individual evaluations, our overall evaluation is always compared to that of other teachers in our grade level/content area, at least on an informal basis.

    Upward mobility - Most people think of the Principal's Office when they think of upward mobility, but there are also jobs in the Central or District Office that would be considered major advancements but do not require the candidate to have experience as a principal or assistant principal. Still, that is the first logical step in most teaching career advancements and it IS available to anyone interested in pursuing it.

    Money/Compensation - As I said before, the author automatically associates "prestige" with "income level". I suppose that is accurate if you go by society's definition, and I agree that teaching - in general - does get treated as a second-class vocation by our society many times. We've all heard the old adage "Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach". I even had a college "friend" say this to me during a political discussion when he began "losing" our argument. There is no doubt the income level for teachers is MUCH lower than other professions requiring the same level of education. This is something I WOULD like to see changed. To me, it seems obvious that placing a high emphasis on the people educating upcoming generations would be essential for ensuring the continued success of our nation. So I will agree with the author that the teaching profession SHOULD carry more prestige and compensation if we truly want to recruit the best and brightest to enter the field.
     
  13. stephenpe

    stephenpe Connoisseur

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2003
    Messages:
    1,922
    Likes Received:
    145

    May 20, 2013

    Well, I would agree that most ambitious people (if you define it as being after $$ and power) rarely become teachers. But the smart part, some of the smartest people I know are teachers. Sadly, many people think you could not be smart if you decided to become a teacher. I quit caring long ago what petty judgmental people think.
     
  14. KinderCowgirl

    KinderCowgirl Phenom

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,858
    Likes Received:
    0

    May 20, 2013

    Well, the smart part from what I read is based on SAT scores-I know I personally could hold a conversation on many different topics that people think are intelligent, however I did not score on any kind of above average score on the SAT. I do know in other countries the top students vie for teaching positions and that's not the way it is here-I don't think that means we can conclude that teachers are not smart.

    The prestige part I disagree with in some respect. Most people, and I'm talking about dealing with strangers, are very impressed when they find you are a teacher-I think there is a certain cache that goes along with the profession-maybe not shown in a salary level, but I do think it does garner respect.
     
  15. a_apple_z_zebra

    a_apple_z_zebra Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2008
    Messages:
    61
    Likes Received:
    0

    May 20, 2013

    Is it just me, or was that article written at a child's reading level?
     
  16. Curiouscat

    Curiouscat Comrade

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2011
    Messages:
    467
    Likes Received:
    0

    May 20, 2013

    I haven't read the article yet, but I just have to say this.....

    I feel pretty smart each summer morning as I sit on my deck enjoying my coffee as my neighbors drive off to their jobs in the business world!:p
     
  17. 2ndTimeAround

    2ndTimeAround Phenom

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Messages:
    4,330
    Likes Received:
    568

    May 20, 2013

    I can see where the author is coming from. There are quite a few professions out there that do no require a lot of intelligence. You simply do not have to be smart in order to be a great teacher. A person with average intelligence can do a great job. A person with slightly lower than average intelligence can do it well too, depending upon the grade level/subject that is being taught.

    But that doesn't mean that teachers as a whole are dumb. I would consider many of my colleagues intelligent. But not most. It just is not a requirement.

    The same thing for nursing. I know almost as many nurses as I do teachers. As you would expect with any cross-section of society, most of them have average intelligence. Some are smart and some are downright dumb. That doesn't mean my neice, who is a nursing student is dumb. She's one of the smartest people I know. She has chosen a profession that feels right to her.
     
  18. 2ndTimeAround

    2ndTimeAround Phenom

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Messages:
    4,330
    Likes Received:
    568

    May 20, 2013

    Adding, because I just saw this on Facebook:

    [​IMG]

    You obviously do not even have to be that smart to be a lawyer!
     
  19. a2z

    a2z Maven

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2010
    Messages:
    5,745
    Likes Received:
    1,668

    May 20, 2013

    :lol::lol:

    I've heard have you or a loved one been injured or killed....

    This is really funny!
     
  20. catnfiddle

    catnfiddle Moderator

    Joined:
    May 8, 2008
    Messages:
    8,317
    Likes Received:
    1,440

    May 20, 2013

    There are some valid points to this essay, if we tilt our heads to the side and squint a little. The emphasis might be more on the ambition than the smart factor. Personally, I'm very ambitious, especially after the conditioning of chasing promotions when I was still in the private sector. However, most of us are in this field for the day-to-day rewards we get from the success of a lesson and our students' reaction to it.
     
  21. lucybelle

    lucybelle Connoisseur

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2012
    Messages:
    1,841
    Likes Received:
    50

    May 20, 2013

    Well it seems like the whole article is based on SAT scores. Which, I think we can all agree, don't completely measure intelligence. Perhaps all the good test takes are becoming engineers, while all the people who feel the system has wronged them are trying to change it from within?
     
  22. redtop

    redtop Companion

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2013
    Messages:
    221
    Likes Received:
    0

    May 20, 2013

    I have two hobbies, both of which I enjoy. (What they are isn't that important.) One is profitable, the other costs money. It it were all about money, I would do only the latter and not the former, but I get a lot of other rewards from the former.

    Well, actually, I'll say that the first one is playing bridge. If there were no bridge tournaments, just games among friends, I could be very ambitious to become the best bridge player I could, but no one but me would really know, and I'd have nothing to measure myself by. Because there are tournaments, I do have the ability to measure my progress - my "ambition."

    A person's happiness is the sum of what they get pleasure from and how much pleasure they get on all those scales. There are doubtless a lot of smart people who choose to become teachers because it's what they want to do. I chose to be an actuary because it was what I wanted to do, and salary played no role in it - I had no idea what actuaries made when I started taking the actuarial exams.

    At the same time - compensation has to be a significant factor in anyone's calculation, and anyone whose personal desires are on the borderline between teaching and investment banking, and who has the ability to do either, will very very likely choose investment banking.

    Likewise, it seems to be a fundamental rule of economics that the pool of people applying for jobs that will pay $200,000+ a year within a reasonable period of time will contain more able individuals than those applying for $50,000 a year jobs. Economics is not all about money - it's about what motivates human behavior - but money is a big motivator.

    So you will have those (like me) who wouldn't become teachers if it paid twice what I make in another profession, and those who wouldn't choose another profession if it paid twice what teaching does. But you're going to have at least some people in that gray area whose balance will be tipped in favor of the higher-paying career.

    Speaking from the outside, it's hard to argue that "ambitious" people won't gravitate to other professions. Take a ground-floor teacher with minimum entry credentials. The best such a teacher could possibly do while remaining in teaching is perhaps within 10 years get a doctorate and become a department head, and maybe in another 5 years become a principal. Their salary might double, and stay at about that level forever, and they'll supervise a staff of maybe 50-150 people, but they'll also never really have policymaking authority - even if they become a superintendent in another 5-10 years they'll be answerable to the school board. Someone really good in the business world could get an MBA from a top-flight B school, within 10 years be making $150-300K and running a small to medium size department, and in another 5-10 years be in the executive suite at high 6/low 7 figures.

    There's a scene in the movie "A Man For All Seasons" (unfortunately I couldn't find the clip on Youtube) where Richard Rich, a politically ambitious nothing, asks Thomas More, Chancellor of England, to help him find a politically connected position. It goes roughly like this:

    More: "I might know of a good position - it pays 50 pounds a year and a servant."
    Rich (very intrigued): "What is it?"
    More:"At the new school."
    Rich: (visibly deflated) "Be a teacher???"
    More: "You'd be a good one."
    Rich: "But if I did, who would know?"
    More: "Yourself, your pupils, God. Not a bad public that."
    Rich: "Those are fine words, coming from someone who's just been speaking with the King."
    More: "Rich, do you know what happens at court? Look at this (showing him a silver goblet). Do you know what it is? It's a bribe. And this is just a small one. At court they bribe you with all sorts of things. Estates, manor houses. A man should go where he won't be tempted. Be a teacher, Rich."


    Epilogue (and a true story, even if the encounter between Rich and More probably was not) - More stands on his conscience refusing to endorse King Henry VIII's divoce from Katherine of Aragon, and is convicted of high treason on the perjured testimony of Richard Rich. He is beheaded, while Rich is knighted and becomes Chancellor of England.
     
  23. 2ndTimeAround

    2ndTimeAround Phenom

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Messages:
    4,330
    Likes Received:
    568

    May 20, 2013

    nice story. And since I am woefully ignorant when it comes to history, I'm glad you shared it.

    But... there is a major flaw in the message it is trying to impart. The "gotcha" at the end is that he became important eventually - knighted and Chancellor. Which contradicts the whole idea that he would have been important as "just" a teacher.
     
  24. Ms. I

    Ms. I Maven

    Joined:
    May 13, 2004
    Messages:
    5,823
    Likes Received:
    139

    May 20, 2013

    So, what are we, chopped liver? ;) I haven't read the article yet, but I will.

    :cool: I TOTALLY agree! Love it! In fact, I think overall society/people LOVE teachers. For example, we're one of the few types of careers who get discounts at various stores, we do get the recognition at some various times, & we still get all holidays & summers off. Can't beat that with a stick!

    Now, I know there's always those with the downside comments, such as teaching is a thankless job & the pay is in the toilet.
     
  25. Cerek

    Cerek Aficionado

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2009
    Messages:
    3,094
    Likes Received:
    0

    May 20, 2013

    Speaking as someone trained and qualified in investments, I don't completely agree with your conclusion that someone who is drawn equally to investment banking and teaching will choose the former because of the greater financial reward.

    I mentioned before that I didn't feel I did a good job as a stockbroker. The fact is, I was the top student in my group studying for the Series 7 test. The test itself was one of the most difficult I've ever taken, but I passed it fairly easily and gained my license as stockbroker. I obviously had both the intelligence and the motivation for the career, so why do I feel I did not do well? Because I discovered the ONLY reason I had chosen that career WAS the financial reward I expected to receive. Once I actually got into the business, I despised it. I'm very good at selling products I believe in. I made spending money in high school by selling pocket knives to fellow students (we were allowed to carry them back then). But I found that I just could NOT "believe in" the product I was selling as a stockbroker. There were other factors of the job I didn't like, but that was the main one.

    For me, my motivation comes from helping others and making a difference in their lives. I guess that's one reason I gravitated to health care after leaving the financial world. The financial compensation was less, but the intangible reward of helping others and providing a needed service gave me much more satisfaction than any amount of money could have given.

    Would it be nice to make $100,000+ per year? Absolutely. For me, that would be equivalent to others who make $500,000 because I've learned to live very simply and to not lust after material things the way I did when I was younger.

    I did buy some Powerball tickets this weekend. I doubt I won anything (haven't checked yet), but if I did, I would buy a few things for myself (the first being a larger house so I would have more room for my mom and my boys). The next would be a better computer. After that? I would make a series of anonymous donations to different charities.

    The point being that the biggest mistake the author seems to make is assuming all "intelligent and motivated" people are motivated by the same thing - prestige, money and success. The author then defines prestige and success in relation to money, but there are different ways to measure prestige and success.

    I had my very first assignment as a substitute teacher in 2009. That group of kids were in middle school then. Now they are juniors and seniors. I taught them for 10 days, yet when I see them now, they STILL go out of their way to speak and tell me how much they enjoyed me as a teacher. I'll take that measure of prestige and success over money any day of the week.

    I also agree with lucy that SAT scores alone are not a great indicator of overall intelligence.
     
  26. tchr4evr

    tchr4evr Companion

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2011
    Messages:
    248
    Likes Received:
    0

    May 20, 2013

    I am offended

    First off, I am a very smart person. I graduated high school with a 4.5 average and was #20 in my class, graduated both B.A. and M.A. with 4.0, did very well on my SATs. I have wanted to be a teacher since I was five--my grandmother was also a teacher, and had 5 different M.A.s and a Ph.D., and she taught for 36 years. As for ambition, ambition is not measured purely by a need for financial gain. I have what I have always wanted in life--a good job (although at times frustrating), a house, a family, time for travel and leisure, and I have countless students I have helped achieve their goals. WOuld I like to make more money--sure, who wouldn't, but if your entire goal in life is to make a lot of money, than you have a very shallow life. If you measure your life by how big a department you run or how many people you are boss to, then again, you must be missing something in your life to feel the need to be defined by that.

    The smartest people are the ones who go after what is the best fit for them, regardless of the financial gain or prestige. If you are happy in your career, none of the rest seems to matter.
     
  27. catnfiddle

    catnfiddle Moderator

    Joined:
    May 8, 2008
    Messages:
    8,317
    Likes Received:
    1,440

    May 20, 2013

    I only took the Series 6, but I did extremely well on it and worked back-office for three financial corporations. It was rewarding to a point, and I was promoted a couple of times, but I'm so glad to be out of that rat race.

    Playing devil's advocate, however, there are a lot of college students who go into a education program because they think it will be easier and a job will be ensured. Those are the teaching candidates who probably will either have a hard time finding work or a hard time keeping it.
     
  28. DrivingPigeon

    DrivingPigeon Phenom

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2008
    Messages:
    4,212
    Likes Received:
    8

    May 20, 2013

    "Smart, ambitious people want society to view them as something great and important, and that’s not a teacher in 2010."

    Annnnnd, I stopped reading there.
     
  29. redtop

    redtop Companion

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2013
    Messages:
    221
    Likes Received:
    0

    May 20, 2013

    I quibble with your description. Based on the continuation of your post, you were in fact not equally drawn to the two fields. You hated many aspects of the investment field - at least the part of that field you chose. And you went on to say that it was mostly the money that attracted you.
     
  30. Cerek

    Cerek Aficionado

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2009
    Messages:
    3,094
    Likes Received:
    0

    May 20, 2013

    Actually, I was far more attracted to the financial field than teaching. In fact, I would never have even considered teaching as a career when I went to college.

    My prime motivation was money. I wanted to make LOTS of money so I could buy LOTS of things and have that "prestige and success" the author speaks about. But once I got into the field, I found it was not nearly as satisfying as I had anticipated. I met some good people, but staying on a phone all day long soon lost it's appeal. I also learned that defining by "success" by the amount of money I made and the way society viewed me was, indeed, very shallow and, ultimately, completely UN-satisfying.

    Only years later, did I begin thinking about a career in teaching (I was working in health care at the time). Once I began my substitute teaching, I FOUND the "prestige and success" that was so
    glaringly absent from the stockbroker field. No, I wasn't making a thousand dollars a day as I could (potentially) have made in investments. What I WAS making was a difference in the lives of others and that was far more satisfying to me.
     
  31. 2ndTimeAround

    2ndTimeAround Phenom

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Messages:
    4,330
    Likes Received:
    568

    May 20, 2013

    That is true. But they won't necessarily have a hard time finding/keeping jobs. Quite a few of my classmates in college were in programs that earned them science degrees while guaranteeing teaching jobs afterward. They had no desire to teach but saw a free chemistry degree as a fair trade off for teaching five years somewhere. All of them were employed immediately and left teaching as soon as they could.
     
  32. Reality Check

    Reality Check Habitué

    Joined:
    May 29, 2010
    Messages:
    910
    Likes Received:
    28

    May 20, 2013

    One big issue the author ignores is the fact that the education field has done nothing (at least in my part of the country) to make the career an attractive one.

    When I started out, it was a solid career and you could be assured of making a decent living. It wasn't a bad choice at all.

    Now....ever since the "No Child Left Behind Act" became effective, it's been a slow deterioration of everything that made the profession worthwhile. The governor of our state is well underway to scrapping our pension plan, wants more teachers fired per year ("How can our state testing scores be at this percentage level of proficiency and yet we have 99% of teachers being rated satisfactory every year?"), and has other measures in the works.

    The School District of Philadelphia wants 5-15% "give-backs" from the teachers in pay and benefits, wants the cap taken off of the 33-kid-per-class limit, wants it written into the new contract that they don't have to supply a teacher's desk, storage for their personal belongings, textbooks (yes, textbooks), and more. They also only want to have to provide one nurse per 1,000 students, cut librarians, cut security personnel, cut out extra curricular activities (included athletics), and on and on....

    There's a growing suspicion that because the city is in such dire financial condition, they want to slowly convert all of the schools over to charter schools, so that they can hire less costly, uncertified teachers. (1/3 of a charter school staff can be uncertified.)

    While the city is an extreme example, don't think other school districts aren't watching to see how this turns out and what they can get away with.

    Why would ANYONE in their right mind, at this point, choose to enter the education profession? It's not a matter of SAT scores, prestige, academic intelligence, or anything else like that. This isn't a minor point which the author overlooks. People value the tuition they're pouring into their college education. They expect decent working conditions if they're going to put that much into it.
     
  33. amakaye

    amakaye Enthusiast

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2004
    Messages:
    2,397
    Likes Received:
    4

    May 20, 2013

    I had the same experience. In fact, it took me until almost the very end of my senior year of high school to decide that I didn't care what anyone else said and I really wanted to be a teacher rather than a doctor, lawyer, businesswoman, etc. In fact, I was almost embarrassed to admit it because of how people would say things like, "You want to be a teacher? But you're so smart, you could be anything!"

    And I'm confused by this part:
    So, the author is saying that the key to improving the education system is attracting teachers who are only in it for themselves and their own ambition? Teachers who would do anything to get ahead? Doesn't sound like the right recipe to me...
     
  34. Peregrin5

    Peregrin5 Maven

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2011
    Messages:
    5,770
    Likes Received:
    1,000

    May 20, 2013

    The article mentions how we need people like the students from Teach For America, but that they're not staying long enough to make a difference.

    I honestly think that's because the TFA kids come in with idealistic ideas, thinking they'll make a difference and change the world and such, and they don't initially realize how HARD teaching is. And they give up, because yes, they're working harder than everyone else and not making as much money.

    On the other hand, you have teachers who are very smart and are ambitious with their personal growth, not just to jump up to some higher position, who prioritize their students well-being and learning rather than their paycheck. I think these people are much more valuable to keep on, rather than the ones who are simply motivated by a hefty paycheck.

    And honestly, I feel a LOT of prestige as a teacher. Parents look up to me, and respect me even though I am MUCH younger than they are. When I talk to them about their kids, they listen to my opinions and my advice and the things I have to say. Kids still find it a shock when their parents come in for a parent-teacher meeting, how humble their parents become, because to the kids I seem like a big brother, but to the parents I am a professional.
     
  35. chebrutta

    chebrutta Enthusiast

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2008
    Messages:
    2,489
    Likes Received:
    0

    May 20, 2013

    Well, heck. If the author is gonna play the SAT card... Nah.

    But who said ambition has to be solely personal? I have plenty of ambition... for my students.

    (Hey, someone in 7th grade has to have it!)

    All kidding aside, the blog is arbitrary. I personally don't believe that all smart and ambitious people are ladder-climbing money-grubbers.

    (But then, I am a teacher, and therefore not smart or ambitious, so I'm probably not interpreting the article correctly.)
     
  36. iteachbx

    iteachbx Enthusiast

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Messages:
    2,096
    Likes Received:
    1

    May 20, 2013

    "Prestige" was enough to make me choose a different major as a freshman in college. Luckily I quickly realized I was being silly.

    I put enough pressure on myself, I don't need competition.

    Upward mobility isn't exactly impossible with teaching (I'm thinking administration) but at this point I've also realized that's probably not what I want either.
     
  37. iteachbx

    iteachbx Enthusiast

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Messages:
    2,096
    Likes Received:
    1

    May 20, 2013

    I think another issue with Teach for America is they know how easy it is to get out. They already have another degree. They basically go in thinking well I'll try this out and if doesn't work I'll go into business and get my MBA or I'll go to law school. When things get tough they can do that.
     
  38. John Lee

    John Lee Groupie

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2009
    Messages:
    1,473
    Likes Received:
    54

    May 20, 2013

    The people who take offense and refuse to read the article tend to reinforce the opinion of this writer. I'm not saying you are dumb and unambitious, but putting your hands on your ears and saying "la-la-la-la-la" is simplistic and lacks objectivity.

    It is not to say that you (as an individual) aren't smart or ambitious. All it does is point out the OBVIOUS--money attracts the best candidates. Money isn't in teaching, so the best and the brightest AREN'T going to go into it.

    I also don't think ambition is the right word. I think the system rewards a complacent attitude, and so it would probably tend to attract those who tend toward it. To me, "ambition" isn't necessarily a positive trait, especially in the K-12 environment.
     
  39. JustMe

    JustMe Virtuoso

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2006
    Messages:
    7,946
    Likes Received:
    3

    May 21, 2013

    I read it last night and wrote a few responses since then but never posted.

    Basically, there are some valid points made. And what I'm going to say in very, very generalized as I know there are extremely intelligent, ambitious teachers. Absolutely. But when I think of the very top students in my graduating class and two years before and after (small town with younger and older siblings...I know of most of them), the majority of those students just don't seem suited for teaching. A huge part of teaching is the right personality (although there certainly isn't one "right" personality type in the classroom), and many of those super intelligent students seem less suited for the interactions involved in teaching. I do think the standards need to be raised for teaching programs (mine required only a 2.5 GPA, although grades aren't the only factor to reconsider), but I don't feel like teaching needs to be advertised or pushed on those who don't have the heart for it.
     
  40. redtop

    redtop Companion

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2013
    Messages:
    221
    Likes Received:
    0

    May 21, 2013

    I can't say I remember what my perceptions of teaching were prior to 1981, but something very significant happened in 1981.

    The PATCO strike.

    You'll recall that the Professional Air Traffic Controllers were legally barred from striking, yet went on strike, assuming that Ronald Reagan couldn't actually fire all of them. Yet he did.

    That was pretty much the beginning of open war by conservatives on public employees. I'm not sure it was any better before that, but at least since then, conservatives have pretty much paid lip service to the "important contribution" made by teachers, policemen and firefighters (mostly while asking for their votes) while ultimately treating anyone who draws from the public fisc as a parasite.

    Conservatives of course generally hate government and anything associated with it. Walk into a random private office building, and a random government office building. Take a guess which one will look like it was painted since the invention of the electronic calculator.

    There's a lot more than money that motivates people, but I don't think anybody, no matter how much money they make or how many people they supervise, likes going to work every day feeling like they are viewed as a plague on society. And there's a segment of the body politic that will look at anyone on the public payroll in just that way. "Thank you for teaching my kid logarithms - now work longer hours and increase your pension contribution, you lazy featherbedding bum."

    I know a lot of private equity and hedge fund types, the kind who built the whose "Heads we win tails you lose" house of cards that crushed the economy, and believe me, every one of them without exception believes they are doing well by doing good. If teachers don't get the prestige, and if they lost their jobs because of the economic implosion, well it's only because they expected lifetime security without actually working hard, and if they didn't want to get real jobs, it's their own fault.

    The best bumper sticker I ever saw was something like "I can't wait for the day when schools get all the money they need and the Air Force has to hold a bake sale to buy a new bomber."

    I may or may not work hard. I may or may not have more education than the average teacher. I may or may not make a greater social contribution. But I've definitely never had anyone tell me that actuaries are over-entitled munchers at the public trough. And it would surely hurt if I did hear that.
     
  41. stephenpe

    stephenpe Connoisseur

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2003
    Messages:
    1,922
    Likes Received:
    145

    May 21, 2013

    Nail on the head. But it will be locked in the dungeon for
    the political slant...........
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Members Online Now

  1. waterfall,
  2. MrsC,
  3. Alexander
Total: 396 (members: 4, guests: 375, robots: 17)
test