MedVision ad

Teacher Pay Increases (2 Viewers)

400miles

Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2004
Messages
379
Ribbon said:
I have NEVER met a teacher who has done so much for someone
I have! Many, many, many, many teachers.


Just like you're sick of people going with this stereotypical view against lawyers I'm sick of the way people treat teachers as if the work they do is inadequate and easy, especially compared with other professions. I've never wanted to compare them and I'm not going to start now, but I think that so many of you generalise teachers too much with the bad experiences you've had. I, personally, would never become a teacher no matter how much they got paid, but I (very much so) respect them and what they do in society.
 

snapperhead

Has decided to retire
Joined
Sep 14, 2003
Messages
3,018
Location
AD1 @ BMGS
Gender
Male
HSC
N/A
Asquithian said:
My standards of what an adequate teacher may well be higher, much higher than what 400 miles would consider an adequate teacher with a high level of professionalism.
LOL.....
"adequate" and "may well be higher"

Sorry...I found this funny.

BTW thanks for being such a good sport about all of this!!!
:)

BTW #2 thanks to the person who rep'ed me for this thread.. very amusing comment!!
 

snapperhead

Has decided to retire
Joined
Sep 14, 2003
Messages
3,018
Location
AD1 @ BMGS
Gender
Male
HSC
N/A
Asquithian said:
I think my point was valid. Some people expect more of their teachers than others.

And adequate doesnt mean good, it just means doing enough to keep their jobs and not bring attention to themselves. I would suspect that most students would prefer their teacher to be better then adequate, or maybe even good or excellent?

There are levels higher than adequate and i hope there are teachers out their who strive to be more than adequate.

On report cards adequate indicates a low mark similar to a 'pass' much like 'satisfactory'. IM sure at the end of your teaching days you would hope that most of the students that you tought thought that you were an excellent or good teacher rather than satisfactory or adequate.

Its not unreasonable to expect a teacher to be excellent or good. But again what is 'good' is highly subjective and what i may term as good probably differs to what 400 miles feels is good.
Yes, I am aware of what the word "adequate" means!!

I am aware of what the term adequate means...my point was to do the context in which you used it

My standards of what an adequate teacher may well be higher, much higher than what 400 miles would consider an adequate teacher with a high level of professionalism.
I would hope that your standards when it comes to an adequate "anything" would be *higher* when it comes to the context of professionalism. Especialy because you are studying to eventually join a professional occupation that gets paid a fair hourly rate for "everything" (including 'take home work'). You are doing law right or am I getting you mixed up with someone else??

AS for your point with regards to working hours. 2 things.
As you keep pointing out, we are on" holidays" so who gets up at 7:30 on their holidays? + as you also pointed, that if we work during the holidays (granted its not 9-5), again, who gets up at 7:30 if they are working from home (BTW its 9am and Im checking my emails before doing some net research on the influence of religion on Australian society for my Year 12's and one of the posters in the SOR forum...at least one of us is doing work. Oh, and my wife who is sitting across the room from me marking the art diaries and major works she didnt finish from yesterday..thta is those she could bring home as she has spent most of last week marking at school by herself (real safe given that her school is in the middle of nowhere. And you may ask, "why didnt you go with her if you were so concerned?"...'cause I was in and out at my new school getting organised and marking work for classes I have never even taught).

So please DONT generalise as there are many teachers out there busting their guts for their schools and their kids. Just because our working environment isnt "normal" and our hours "regular" doesnt mean that the other aspects of the job (which is sorta obvious from your posts that you dont have any concept of ie its a lot more than just marking little Johnnies trig paper) doesnt mean that the job isnt difficult or underpaid....

Just some food for thought.....
LOL
 
Last edited:

Iron

Ecclesiastical Die-Hard
Joined
Jul 14, 2004
Messages
7,765
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
Those rates of pay were compared to other state employed public servants at similar levels of work value. Because teacher's work value had changed so much since the 70s (last teachers wage rise) (eg. OH&S) the IRC found they were entitled to a rise...consequently, because of that ruling, it's not likely that police and nurses will demand a pay rise based on the teachers ruling.
 

Ribbon

Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2003
Messages
455
snapperhead said:
You are joking right.....
(not speaking as a teacher just an interested lurker)
You logic is that just because you have not met a teacher who financially helped someone that all teachers are 'useless or do nothing for anyone? What about the teachers who give up their time to work with students in their own time or the teachers that visit students and parents at home in times of need? What about the teacher that act as an inspiration to their students or the teacher that simply shows an interest in a student when the student has no-one else to show an interest in them? (and no, not in the context that some ppl will take it in!)

As someone studying law, I would have expected at least some rational thought and logic.
I know you were responding to attack on lawyers (just as Im responding to some illogical rhetoric against teachers) but come on. At least make some sense if you are going to sound off in defence of your profession.....
LOL
;)
When did I say all teachers were 'useless or do nothing for anyone'? Just because I have njever met a teacher who has done as much for someone doesn't mean I think they are all useless and don't help others. Just because I don't think they deserve a pay rise, doesn't mean I think they are all useless and don't help others. Just because I defended the sterotypical generalisations about lawyers that they are all leeches doesn't mean I think all teachers are useless. It is no secret that I had alot of teachers who were absolutely useless, but I am sure I have already said somewhere in this thread that I also had some great teachers (who, for the record, I also don't think deserve a payrise).

I don't understand how you think I have implied/stated that ALL teachers are useless from this post (or any other)... I find it amusing that you commented on rational thought and logic which wasn't mine at all, but yours in leaping to conclusions about what I have supposedly said!
 
Last edited:

Ribbon

Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2003
Messages
455
snapperhead said:
If I may add some others.....most professional athletes (esp. footballers), most CEO's and IMO, anything to do with technology (mid to high range stuff I mean).
Based on my experience lawyers also fall into this category but then again, this will probably open up a can of worms.......!!
;)

----I know that this is three posts in a row but i wanted to make them separate posts (easier on the eyes!!!)

Mid to high range technology stuff? I know the IT support Officer of a major government support organisation (nation wide) who is a manager in all but name. He has to provide tech support for all local sites, including server, as well as organise a range of contractors to provide IT support to the sites nation-wide (which is why I say he may as well be a manager, because his job is primarily organising the contractors). He is on just under $45 000 a year. If he is overpaid, then surely teachers are too? I also know a lower level IT tech guy working for a private company who after 3 years of study and a few years of work is only just clearing $30 000 a year...

'Most CEOs' - you cannot compare teachers to CEOs. CEOS are extremely rare compared to teachers. They are highly, highly specialised and it takes years and years of study and work experience to rise to the level of CEO. One in hundreds of thousands of graduates in business fields has the ability/will become a CEO but every teaching graduate has the ability to become a teacher. Dido with footballers - alot of people can play football but a very very small number will be skilled enough to become pros. You can't compare teachers pays with those of extremely specialised proffessions which have a very limited number of positions (like movie stars, CEOs (who may as well be 'business stars') and sports stars).
 

snapperhead

Has decided to retire
Joined
Sep 14, 2003
Messages
3,018
Location
AD1 @ BMGS
Gender
Male
HSC
N/A
Ribbon said:
Mid to high range technology stuff? I know the IT support Officer of a major government support organisation (nation wide) who is a manager in all but name. He has to provide tech support for all local sites, including server, as well as organise a range of contractors to provide IT support to the sites nation-wide (which is why I say he may as well be a manager, because his job is primarily organising the contractors). He is on just under $45 000 a year. If he is overpaid, then surely teachers are too? I also know a lower level IT tech guy working for a private company who after 3 years of study and a few years of work is only just clearing $30 000 a year...

'Most CEOs' - you cannot compare teachers to CEOs. CEOS are extremely rare compared to teachers. They are highly, highly specialised and it takes years and years of study and work experience to rise to the level of CEO. One in hundreds of thousands of graduates in business fields has the ability/will become a CEO but every teaching graduate has the ability to become a teacher. Dido with footballers - alot of people can play football but a very very small number will be skilled enough to become pros. You can't compare teachers pays with those of extremely specialised proffessions which have a very limited number of positions (like movie stars, CEOs (who may as well be 'business stars') and sports stars).
I was replying to the call of "list other overpaid jobs". As stated, I believe (using broad assumptions and illogic as most of the posts here!) that professional footballers ARE overpaid (esp. in soccer) as are most "professional" (note teh stress) athletes in sports where money is an option. Im sorry, but paying a 18 year old US10+ million for 2 years to play basketball (no matter how good he is) is being overpaid....the same goes for the CEO's of large companies whose pay in both options etc is in the millions of $$ a year for running a business (again, it doesnt matter how much it earns or what the business does, its still a business (am using your logic here)

With regards to IT, just because you know a guy (btw: I wouldnt call tech support mid to high range technology stuff...I did that in my last job!) doesnt mean that I dont think they are overpaid. To use your line of argument I also know someone (my brother in law) who is on $125,000/year and he works in IT. His job? To install a pay system into mid to large organisations (he has just finished working at UNSW in the Arts area). Even he admits its ridiculous what he gets paid and he's a contractor so he's the cheaper quote!...Even when you get your computer fixed, its like $60-1$00 an hour...thats overpaying!

As to your point of "non-specialising"...um, not quite. Any Uni graduate (as you sorta pointed out) is a specialist (they trained for it!!) Look at your last point and re-read it
"One in hundreds of thousands of graduates in business fields has the ability/will become a CEO". I think you are underselling (over grossly over-estimating which I guess goes with the job) the ability of any uni graduate (of which you are one). To use your logic, you may not progress any further up the the law tree (sorry I am not familiar with the various bits of law!) because you are not "the one". Ditto with footballers and the like (and you dare to place movie stars in the not overpaid category?..please, what fantasy world are you living in?)
I can compare teachers to any profession I like as I am one! Teaching is a highly specialised job (look at options available in education at Uni alone let alone education in the real world)

Re-read what I said, in the context of the question that was asked and please stop being so defensive.
"but every teaching graduate has the ability to become a teacher"...gold comment...Hope you learn to do better than this when you are out in the real world (though you may not be using your logic!!)

*stir*
 

snapperhead

Has decided to retire
Joined
Sep 14, 2003
Messages
3,018
Location
AD1 @ BMGS
Gender
Male
HSC
N/A
Ribbon said:
When did I say all teachers were 'useless or do nothing for anyone'?
My words not yours ..hence the ' ' not " "
sorry, simple English....
LOL
mmmmmmmm....
 

Alvin Yeap

I AM alvin dammit!
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
37
Location
ALvin ALvin YEAP!
In 2003 the salaries for teachers in NSW government schools were:

Starting salary 4-year trained (eg BEd) = $41,109
Starting salary 5-year trained (eg BEd BA, BEd BSc, BA MTeach, BSc MTeach) = $43,225
Top of teacher salary scale (Step 13) = $58,692
Head teacher i.e. subject head = $66,534
Deputy Principal = from $64,977 to $76,923
Principal = from $77,915 to $95,101


pinched off usyd website
 

Enlightened_One

King of Bullshit
Joined
Oct 28, 2003
Messages
1,105
Location
around about here - still
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
If the teaching profession was given a pay rise like 90 000 a year then more people, especially those more talented would enter into it. The UAI would go up and smarter people would try for it.

I would take no less than a hundred grand to put up with what my clasess gave teachers when I was a little shit.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 2)

Top