On Wed, 18 Jan 2017 21:47:48 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 18 Jan 2017 13:36:07 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 18 Jan 2017 13:47:51 GMT, (Scott Lurndal)
wrote:

writes:
On Tue, 17 Jan 2017 20:33:41 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 17 Jan 2017 13:12:01 -0500, wrote:
snip
$100K salary isn't rare, absolute job security, and 100% retirement
after 30 years, isn't pocket change. There is _no_corelation between
teacher pay and student performance. Of course, administration costs
don't help anyone, except administrators.
I was talking to a teacher, a policeman, and a firefighter in
Flkorida about 15 or so years ago, and they were all paid so poorly
they had to work second jobs to make ends meet - less than $40,000 for
each of the three. That's what I based my comment on.

A good teacher with a lot of experience who really does their job in
an inner city school might be worth on the high side of $100,000, but
an idler in a decent school? I agree with you - no way.

But there is no difference. They all get paid the same.

Not everywhere.

They do in the US.

No, they don't.

Bull****. They're paid by senioity, not performance. *EVERYWHERE* in
the US.
But they are not all paid the same for the same seniority - it varies
significantyly from district to district or at least state to state.

That's not the point. The incentives are all wrong. The education
system is fatally broken.