The Economics of Education

[Under the Lights]

Other thread got me thinking as to why teachers are paid so little.

 

I have come up with this: Since we have public schools, in which you are put into a school determined by where you live, parents can choose school either school for free or very expensive private school.

 

Since the parents have no choices (due to districts) to pick the best school for their kids, the respective public school districts have very little incentive to pay teachers well, which would in turn attract more highly qualified teachers.

 

What I am saying is that, I believe, that the reason schools don't pay teachers much is because the schools aren't in competition with each other. There is no reason to be the best school in your area. It is like having a monopoly on the "education industry" in their certain area.

 

This is a reason that I believe that it seems that wherever there are more schools in one area, the higher quality of education in that area.

 

Competition is part of it, but here is another and this one is quite scary.

 

In our society we assign value based on demand for a product right? People demand that we have doctors, so they are highly paid. Less of a demand for movie store clerks, so they aren't paid as much. So exactly what value are we placing on our children's education? The numbers should tell you all you need to know.

 

Teachers are underpaid because we don't demand a great education for our children. If we did, economically speaking, we would be willing to pay for it. Now we demand that our teachers be highly qualified, that they get a master's degree, that they teach our children how to become productive citizens..........of course, that makes total sense:rolleyes:

 

To address the competition issue, I think it unwise to place capitalism and education in the same arena. One has the primary goal of maximizing profits, the other the "common good". Those two goals don't always mesh well together.

 

For instance, if schools competed, you could potentially have school A that was a top notch academic school, and school B that was a highly ineffective academic school. Where do you think people would want to send their kids? Where would teachers want to teach? What would you do when school A reached its maximum capacity? Build more? Then you'd need more teachers.....where would they come from?

[AcesFull]

What do you do with the elementary teachers who teach math and science?

I would pay whatever it took to hire and retain them at a reasonable rate. If there is a large surplus of elementary teachers willing to teach math and science, then their pay would be lower.

[Mr.Fundamental]

Competition is part of it, but here is another and this one is quite scary.

 

In our society we assign value based on demand for a product right? People demand that we have doctors, so they are highly paid. Less of a demand for movie store clerks, so they aren't paid as much. So exactly what value are we placing on our children's education? The numbers should tell you all you need to know.

 

Teachers are underpaid because we don't demand a great education for our children. If we did, economically speaking, we would be willing to pay for it. Now we demand that our teachers be highly qualified, that they get a master's degree, that they teach our children how to become productive citizens..........of course, that makes total sense:rolleyes:

 

To address the competition issue, I think it unwise to place capitalism and education in the same arena. One has the primary goal of maximizing profits, the other the "common good". Those two goals don't always mesh well together.

 

For instance, if schools competed, you could potentially have school A that was a top notch academic school, and school B that was a highly ineffective academic school. Where do you think people would want to send their kids? Where would teachers want to teach? What would you do when school A reached its maximum capacity? Build more? Then you'd need more teachers.....where would they come from?

 

I have been saying this for years... keep the numbers low... but as you point out no one wants to pony up the money

[Mr.Fundamental]

I would pay whatever it took to hire and retain them at a reasonable rate. If there is a large surplus of elementary teachers willing to teach math and science, then their pay would be lower.

 

What is an education worth... or what is a reasonable rate?

[Under the Lights]

I have been saying this for years... keep the numbers low... but as you point out no one wants to pony up the money

 

So you build more (which I am in favor of as well), then what? If you keep the same amount of "great teachers" that made school A great in the first place, then the class sizes will continue to rise, leading to less individual attention and interaction. In most cases this would likely result in a diminishing of the overall instruction. Now we are headed back towards school B.

 

If you hire more teachers, they have to come from somewhere, and people aren't banging down the doors so more than likely they would come from the school that was just vacated.......which would kind of defeat the purpose now, wouldn't it?

[Under the Lights]

What is an education worth... or what is a reasonable rate?

 

:thumb:These are the questions that need to be answered. Are we to treat our education like our food? Our clothes? Our cars? Are they all "worth" the same?

[AcesFull]

I completely understand your economic analysis of the education profession. In fact, I kind of agree. But here is my beef with that point: Are educators, particularly those in the K-12 range, not providing additional benefits to society as a whole other than direct education? Is there a way to economically quantify the fact that most of our population can read and write? What is that worth? Is it worth more than being able to add and subtract? Is that worth more than understanding our past, how the human mind works, or basic economics? How do you quantify that?

 

I think the real question you need to ask is why. Why aren't people banging down the door to teach math and science? Maybe because for many THEIR educational system failed them, and they aren't very good at either. For those that are, why would you want to when so many other lucrative jobs can be easily had with their skills?

 

Finally, the main problem I have with your argument is that people simply WON'T pay the "market price". Everyone wants their child to have a great education, but they don't want to empower the educators with the means to give it to their child. "Not in my backyard" they say.

The value of any person's work product in a free society is what others are willing to pay for their services, no more and no less. Only when government, unions, or other non-competitive forces intervene do people end up paid far more or far less than their services are worth. Otherwise, the free market is a pretty fair arbiter of salary levels.

 

People are not banging down the doors of schools to teach math and science in large numbers because most of those who have the ability to teach those subjects effectively are taking better paying jobs in the private sector. That is why I have no problem paying math and science teachers more to attract more qualified teaching candidates and to influence students' career decisions.

 

The flip side of my position is that if there are more teachers of PE, English, history, or other subject area than can easily be absorbed by the job market, those salaries should be reduced to the minimum level necessary to attract and retain teachers in those areas.

 

I am not advocating slashing current salaries suddenly, just allowing schools to gradually adjust pay scales to reflect market realities.

[AcesFull]

What is an education worth... or what is a reasonable rate?

It depends on the education and how it is applied by the one who receives it. Should Bill Gates' first grade teacher receive a huge bonus? Should Ken Lay's high school accounting teacher have his salary slashed? I don't think so.

[Mr.Fundamental]

It depends on the education and how it is applied by the one who receives it. Should Bill Gates' first grade teacher receive a huge bonus?

 

:laugh:

 

I know you were being serious but that just struck me as funny.

[Mr.Fundamental]

I teach in a top five school in the state of Kentucky, so should I get paid more

 

http://www.usnews.com/articles/education/high-schools/2007/11/29/americas-best-high-schools.html

[Mr.Fundamental]

How is it applied... I am curious that my pay should depend on someone elses productivity... I mean if a patient dies, does the Dr. not take pay?

[Under the Lights]

It depends on the education and how it is applied by the one who receives it. Should Bill Gates' first grade teacher receive a huge bonus? Should Ken Lay's high school accounting teacher have his salary slashed? I don't think so.

 

I knew I would get the nuts and bolts econ answer from you. :thumb:

 

The problem I have with paying math and science more is that you are now placing a higher value on teaching math and science than being able to read and write? See where I'm going with this?

 

As I stated earlier, capitalism and education are not good bed mates. One seeks to maximize profits, the other to promote the "common good". You cannot use capitalistic values and measures to assess an entity whose primary goal is the exact opposite of capitalism.

[Under the Lights]

I teach in a top five school in the state of Kentucky, so should I get paid more

 

http://www.usnews.com/articles/education/high-schools/2007/11/29/americas-best-high-schools.html

 

Ooo, ooo, I don't.......can I come teach there instead of teaching all of these "low scoring" inner city kids? Maybe THAT'S why I haven't been getting paid much.........:lol:

[Mr.Fundamental]

Ooo, ooo, I don't.......can I come teach there instead of teaching all of these "low scoring" inner city kids? Maybe THAT'S why I haven't been getting paid much.........:lol:

 

:lol:

 

The sad part is this is how most people think. You and I can laugh about it, because we both know the joys, headaches, heartaches, and so for of teaching. However, most people just look at the bottom line, a test number.:madman:

 

I would like for people to step in your shoes for a day, then maybe, we all could get paid.

:banana:

 

Just for the record I teach the 5th poorest community in the state.:cry:

[ladiesbballcoach]

In Kentucky, a school year consists of 185 required days of attendance. If you add 15 days for in-service and preparing your room for the school year (which is generous), that totals 200 days of work for the average teacher. A year round worker has 260 days of work (5 days times 52 weeks).

 

$65,000 divided by 200 days = $325.00 per day.

$85,000 divided by 260 days = $326.92 per day.

 

If that person who makes $85,000 a year took an extra 2 or 3 months off of work, they would be paid the same rate as the teacher.

 

There are summer positions in every school district required for curriculum mapping, planning, etc. Take one of these jobs during the summer and you'll make what other professionals are making. Otherwise, sit back and enjoy the benefit of having your summers free.

 

Do you have an application for that district?

 

18 years and about $40,000 with no coaching, here.