AHC: teacher unions popular in the United States?

How much does a full time teacher in the USA make? One of my best mates is a teacher and he makes almost $90k although he is one of the coordinators. I am aware that teachers work long hours and most public holidays fall in school holiday time, but they still get a fuckload of holidays to well and truly compensate.

Maybe if he stopped bitching about being tired. I mean he's a teacher for fucks sake, if he's getting tired he has to be doing it wrong. :-D
 
I am and I'm proud of it!
Good man. I'm doing a Primary PGCE next year. :)
I teach Maths which means teaching every student up to the GCSEs taken in Year 11 (15-16 year olds) (as do English and Science). This makes it harder, as we have to teach the uninterested (when am I ever going to use this in life?) and get the results from them.
Ouch, that's rough. My cousin coordinates A Level Maths at an FE College, after spending about three years in a Secondary School. He reckons that's the biggest difference. The only people doing A Level Maths want to be there, and know they need to learn the stuff, for further study.

I think that one of the problems is that everybody has been to school, so they think they 'know' about teaching. That leads to pedagogy being chronically underrated.
 
Good man. I'm doing a Primary PGCE next year. :)
Head within ten years then:D

Ouch, that's rough. My cousin coordinates A Level Maths at an FE College, after spending about three years in a Secondary School. He reckons that's the biggest difference. The only people doing A Level Maths want to be there, and know they need to learn the stuff, for further study.

True but they all find it a BIG step up from GCSE and that defeats a lot. Especially as A Level is nearly all algebra.

I think that one of the problems is that everybody has been to school, so they think they 'know' about teaching. That leads to pedagogy being chronically underrated.

How true.
 
I would reply but ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ:D

Maybe you could use the massive piles of cash you get from telling kids to read a book 3 weeks a year as a pillow!

Seriously, I get the impression that teachers in the USA aren't nearly as well paid as here. Do you have to do a 4 year degree? My mate has a masters which gets him more money.
 
Maybe you could use the massive piles of cash you get from telling kids to read a book 3 weeks a year as a pillow!

Seriously, I get the impression that teachers in the USA aren't nearly as well paid as here. Do you have to do a 4 year degree? My mate has a masters which gets him more money.

You have to have a four year degree and then you can get more money with advanced degrees. Mom and dad were both public school teachers and their salaries went up as the added advanced education.

Teaching in the US can vary from state to state and while you will definitely will not get rich you can do okay as long as it is a dual income household. Once my mom went back to work things were a lot better and both enjoy comfortable retirements. Again, that can vary from state to state. I was raised in Ohio and the state of Ohio has an excellent teacher pension program. I can't speak for other states.
 
I have an Hons BSc (3 years) then a PGCE (Post Graduate Certificate of Education) which usually lasts one year but in my case was two as it was a conversion course to teach Maths (even in the mid to late 80s there was a serious shortage of Maths Teachers). I got the PGCE plus an Advanced Diploma in Mathematics (ie I well and truly passed the first year of the Maths Degree).
You can become a teacher by getting a B.Ed which was a 3 or 4 year course depending on the institution.

PGCEs are all but dead as the Governments (ie both Conservative and Labour) seem to prefer on the job training of various sorts. However now you have to have worked in a school before you start your teacher training. Most seem to work as a classroom assistant for a year. It's not a bad idea it gets rid of the idea that teaching is a doss!
 

jahenders

Banned
I remember living in New England when there was a teachers' strike and some of the letters in the paper said, teachers get the whole Summer off! So, some of it is just flat-out jealousy.

Plus, some Republicans such as Wisconsin governor Scott Walker have been successful at positioning themselves against unions for public employees and presumably this includes teachers' unions. In addition, conservatives have been largely successful at portraying the NEA (National Education Association) as a bastion of liberalism.

But, what if things were different?

This should arguably be a DBWI. Teachers unions ARE popular in the US based on multiple key criteria:
1) Almost all teachers join them, either because they have no choice (because state laws allow them to be forced to do so) or because the states have structured contracts so that joining the union is the only way to get comprehensive benefits (i.e. the state stopped offering things so the unions could).

2) In most states teachers unions essentially set the agenda on education in that state -- state depts of education and local school boards are just along for the ride

3) People, or representatives, vote for aspects of the union's agenda a good percentage of the time -- pay raises, etc. This despite the fact that the union agenda usually has little, if anything, to do with kids getting a better education (as the ATF president once famously said, "I'll start worrying about kids when they start paying union dues).
 
2) In most states teachers unions essentially set the agenda on education in that state -- state depts of education and local school boards are just along for the ride
What went through my head when I read that is unprintable! That is FAR from the case over here!
 
I mean teachers unions popular with the general public.

And I can think of one potential POD which was mentioned earlier, the Boston police strike of 1919.* Now, if the police announce the strike ahead of time or strike for an extended period, that's irresponsible and there's no way around that. There really isn't. But if the police have a 2-hour lightning strike where they keep a skeleton crew and don't announce, that's smart. There could even be a running joke that if only the criminals had known ahead of time! And following, let's suppose the union is successful in getting the public to see the grievances.

And let's further suppose the mayor of Boston orders both sides back to the negotiating table to bargain in good faith. Now, that's probably not exactly within the purview of the mayor. But let's say both sides accept this, largely as a way to save face.

The police and the city negotiate an alright deal. And then, (?) perhaps over the years most citizens come to see a public employees union as mainly about collective bargaining, with strikes only a rare bird (?). Well, maybe.

-----

* Earlier I said the Boston police strike was during FDR's time in office. That's a mistake. The Boston police strike happened in 1919 during the "Red Scare" period in Wilson's last couple of years. And perhaps during Wilson's incapacitation when Mrs. Edith Wilson and Naval doctor and president's personal physician Dr. Cary Grayson were essentially running the executive branch.
 
Last edited:
I have been work at a special needs school this past year and it seems to me that a lot of the things teachers unions get blamed for are really the fault of the administrators and their union.

For teachers unions to be more popular, teachers have to be more popular. Most of the time they are scapegoats for parents/administration/government.
 

jahenders

Banned
What went through my head when I read that is unprintable! That is FAR from the case over here!

While the depts of education and/or school boards may decide curriculum (usually stupidly), it's often the teachers unions that decide what the true battle ground issues are going to be -- what's going to be fought about in the legislature or on the ballot -- wages, class size, etc.
 

jahenders

Banned
I have been work at a special needs school this past year and it seems to me that a lot of the things teachers unions get blamed for are really the fault of the administrators and their union.

For teachers unions to be more popular, teachers have to be more popular. Most of the time they are scapegoats for parents/administration/government.

I think the key thing that would make teachers unions more popular is if they were seen as fighting for issues that really help kids get an education. Instead, the real focus is ALWAYS pay, benefits, workload, and protection from firing.

Even the recent strike in Detroit was about perceived threats to teacher pay -- they cited poorly maintained schools and such, but they didn't strike because some teachers work in poorly maintained schools or (more importantly) because kids go to school in bad schools.

Likewise, the unions typically line up to fight FOR terrible teachers who the district is trying to fire -- their focus is on protecting teachers NOT on aiding education. That may not be unreasonable for a union, but sometimes puts them on the wrong side of issues that people care about.

When I see a teachers union strike because the school administration is forcing them to pass kids that should fail, give out higher grades than are warranted, or teach stupid crap of no value; THEN I'll be more of a fan.
 
maybe if it was understood just how much continuing ed teachers do, perhaps roughly comparable to CPAs

And then if just the whole U.S. economy, Nixon's (?)'71 wage and prize freeze, the OPEC oil embargo of '73, the recession of '75

a politics of scarcity and kind of made people mean.
 
Top