How would you go about hiring hard to find teachers?

[guzzijohn]

With all the teacher bashing that has gone on here I want to get some more input. Lets say that you are president of your local school board or the superintendent how would you go about obtaining teachers in the areas of science, math and special education that are so hard to find? Over the last few years the Wichita district has been recruiting teachers from the Phillippines due to not being able to find American teachers for these areas. Is this the way to go?
GuzziJohn

[Old Fart]

You could do like everyone else in the region and recruit them out of Oklahoma........
We've got so many teacher colleges you can't throw a rock without hitting one.

Here where I instruct we've been real lucky hiring good staff.
Of course we pay a little better than other local schools.

[magooch]

You could start by going to any institute of higher learning and request a list of students who are just about to flunk out.

[Buckskin]

Same here, saturated with teachers in this state.  Usually several hundred applicants per position.  And I've never heard of any shortage for special needs around hear anyway.  My college roomate went into (20 years ago) went into special needs/PhyEd, took him 4 years to get a job...

[no guns here]

Why would anyone WANT to teach in this day and age?  In most places, the pay sucks.  Kids curse you out and you aren't allowed to do anything about it.  Kids can say and do anything they want and you can't do anything about it.  You aren't allowed to punish them.  The school won't punish them either.  You can't fail a kid, you have to give them 23 chances to do make-up work or to get extra credit.  Most of the kids seem to be there for the sex and "socialization".  Parents won't stand up to their kids and make them behave, the parents only get pissed and say "you can't do that to my kid".  There is NO way I would be a teacher in public schools today.  POSSIBLY in a private school.  MAYBE in a DOD school in certain places but not all.  It just isn't worth the pain, danger, and aggravation.


NGH

[guzzijohn]

Quote by Old Fart:

You could do like everyone else in the region and recruit them out of Oklahoma........
We've got so many teacher colleges you can't throw a rock without hitting one.

I don't know. A year ago or so there were several articles in the Wichita paper about recruiting difficulties in science, math and special education. The school district said that they had put the word out nation wide for teachers plus traveling to a number of teacher job fairs. They still couldn't fill all the positions and that is why they started recruiting from out of country. Wichita may have more difficulty finding teachers for math and science areas due to the aircraft industry there and that they pay so much better. A beginning engineer with a BS degree will have a starting pay higher than a 20+ year teacher with a masters.
GuzziJohn

[Buckskin]

Quote by Old Fart:

You could do like everyone else in the region and recruit them out of Oklahoma........
We've got so many teacher colleges you can't throw a rock without hitting one.

I don't know. A year ago or so there were several articles in the Wichita paper about recruiting difficulties in science, math and special education. The school district said that they had put the word out nation wide for teachers plus traveling to a number of teacher job fairs. They still couldn't fill all the positions and that is why they started recruiting from out of country. Wichita may have more difficulty finding teachers for math and science areas due to the aircraft industry there and that they pay so much better. A beginning engineer with a BS degree will have a starting pay higher than a 20+ year teacher with a masters.
GuzziJohn

Well maybe the just don't want to live in Kansas. Although I wouldn't mind it, damn big bucks down there!

No offense, but I would hope an engineer designing airplanes would make more than any teacher...  And the masters program for teaching is not what I would call taxing...

[guzzijohn]

Quote from Buckskin:

No offense, but I would hope an engineer designing airplanes would make more than any teacher...

No offense taken, but how did the engineer learn to become an engineer? Had to be a teacher or two in there somewhere. I will grant you that a Masters in education may not in someways be as taxing as a masters in engineering  but it still took time, commitment, effort and money out of the teacher's pocket. Once that engineer is employed chances are that any further education will be payed for by the employer, not out of the individuals pocket as a teacher has to.
GuzziJohn

[Junior1942]

Google " Mychal Bell " and find out what's wrong with public education.  Football has priority even in high school.

[45-70.gov]

i would offer more money at first

i would get that money by increasing class size
and fireing the sorry teachers and get rid of unions
also save money by expelling bad students

in the long run....some of the money saving will go to scholarships
in the feilds i need special teachers
they would be in an  indentured  work program for 10 years
to re-imburse the tax payers for their education

[guzzijohn]

Quote from 45-70:

also save money by expelling bad students

Talk to your congressman about getting some laws changed. Once that is done what happens to those students that you expelled? We will probably pay a fortune supporting them in jail for the rest of their lives.
GuzziJohn

[dukkillr]

What you are asking is the very basis for many people's objection to the union.  That being, that the amount of compensation does not equal the fair market value for that set of skills.  Part of the problem is the absurd idea that all teachers are worth the same amount to both society and the students (theoretically, the customers).  But they aren't.  Find a random kid who works hard but is just a high school grad and he could make a find PE teacher.  It's going to take much more than that to fill the AP Chemistry and Calc. teacher positions.  It's a simple fact that one is more in demand and less in supply.

So the answer is that you pay whatever it takes.  That's what those people are worth.  If it costs you 250k a year to get a teacher capable of teaching Calc, (and it won't) then that's what you pay, because that is what that person brings on the open market.  If it costs you 22k a year to get a 6th grade history teacher (and it might be about that) that's what you pay that person because that's what that person's skills are worth on the open market.

The reality is that some people bring more to the profession than others, those people deserve to be paid as such.  Compensation should be tied to actual value.  When it's not you get backlash against the unions from people who have to actually prove their worth in the open market every day. 

[guzzijohn]

Dukkiller,
You probably make to much sense for that to work. Currently in Kansas if you are a teacher and take retirement you can then go back to work as a teacher but you negotiate your own contract. It should probably work that way for all teaching positions. Another poster mentioned and I agree that with hard to fill positions a district could offer to pay the teacher's schooling costs for so many years of service. That would give some students from low income families a chance.
GuzziJohn

[Buckskin]

Dukkiller,
You probably make to much sense for that to work. Currently in Kansas if you are a teacher and take retirement you can then go back to work as a teacher but you negotiate your own contract. It should probably work that way for all teaching positions. Another poster mentioned and I agree that with hard to fill positions a district could offer to pay the teacher's schooling costs for so many years of service. That would give some students from low income families a chance.
GuzziJohn

Wow, I think we are getting somewhere!  That is exactly what Walker is trying to do in Wisconsin!!!

[dukkillr]

Dukkiller,
You probably make to much sense for that to work. Currently in Kansas if you are a teacher and take retirement you can then go back to work as a teacher but you negotiate your own contract. It should probably work that way for all teaching positions. Another poster mentioned and I agree that with hard to fill positions a district could offer to pay the teacher's schooling costs for so many years of service. That would give some students from low income families a chance.
GuzziJohn

Wow, I think we are getting somewhere!  That is exactly what Walker is trying to do in Wisconsin!!!

It's hard to get anywhere when people spend so much of their time just trying to insult the other person.  If logic supports your ideas you should not need to be calling people names... jmho  Others aren't capable of thinking for themselves so they just keep regurgitating the crap they see on cable news (which channel depends on who you want feeding you your thoughts).  For the less thoughtful it is simply too easy to hitch your thoughts to someone else, except that you never develop the fundamental understanding you might have if you came up with it yourself.  Anyway, that's the way America is today...

I do think it's hard for teachers (or anyone really) to come to grips with the idea that who they are, and what they do, isn't really worth what they would like.  Honestly, no one would like to hear, "You know, you're easily replaceable with any of a thousand applicants."  But in a capitalist society that's exactly the case.  The amount you earn should be directly related to the skills you bring to the table.  Some people are brilliant, natural public speakers with great teaching skill.  Some are just people who, "don't test well" and couldn't figure out how to make a living with a sociology degree.  They aren't worth the same to the employer, they shouldn't be paid the same.  The open market is not meant to be an insult, rather it's the only fair way...

[guzzijohn]

Quote from Buckskin:

Wow, I think we are getting somewhere!  That is exactly what Walker is trying to do in Wisconsin!!!

Except that he is trying to cram it down the throats to hard and to quick. Maybe if he started with something like in 2013 all new hires will have to negotiate there salaries and benefits. Also keep in mind the one thing that set salaries does help is in budget planning for the business or school district. Without that the payout in salaries and benefits would be much more of a wildcard. Lastly a method needs to be developed to fast track retired people from business and industry into teaching positions. It does not make sense to me that a person with 30 years of experience in a certain field should be required to go to school for a minimum of four years to teach in their field. Instead require education methods classes and assign a strong mentor teacher to them during their first year and they should do fine.
GuzziJohn

[Buckskin]

It does not make sense to me that a person with 30 years of experience in a certain field should be required to go to school for a minimum of four years to teach in their field. Instead require education methods classes and assign a strong mentor teacher to them during their first year and they should do fine.


Again, another thing Walker is trying to do.  But you have to get rid of the unions to do that.  Seems most of your ideas are against the collective bargaining idealology...  Which doesn't suprise me.  Most people would be if they went issue by issue of what the unions have done. Instead of just seeing weakening collective bargaining...

[Old Fart]

Part of the problem with many of todays teachers is that they went into that field because they had no other vision for thier future.
They leave high school with no idea of what that want to be, only memory they have is one of thier favorite teachers.
They last one to three years and quit, constant turnover in the rank which also effects student performance.
If you go look at the education most of the state workers have in our state you'll find education degrees.
For many it was the only other job where they only require a 4 year degree.
But back to the original problem, a lot of them have been laid off and probably went on to greener pastures.
I'm afraid for a lot of people Wichita wouldn't really be somewhere they would head to.
Nothing against it, I actually think it's pretty up there, but most people will head to lets say more populated regions.

[45-70.gov]

Quote from 45-70:

also save money by expelling bad students

Talk to your congressman about getting some laws changed. Once that is done what happens to those students that you expelled? We will probably pay a fortune supporting them in jail for the rest of their lives.
GuzziJohn

the expelled  ones can work those  jobs vacated by the illegal immigrant round up
prison  budget is as messed up as the school budget

one bad kid can disrupt 30 good kids.....sounds like a good ridance

[guzzijohn]

Quote from 45-70:

the expelled  ones can work those  jobs vacated by the illegal immigrant round up

What makes you think those kids would do those jobs? They won't even do school work. Most of these kids would be expelled, if possible, well before they turn 18 so under current child protection laws there are not very many jobs they could do. They will turn to stealing, robbing and drug dealing.
GuzziJohn

[45-70.gov]

Quote from 45-70:

the expelled  ones can work those  jobs vacated by the illegal immigrant round up

What makes you think those kids would do those jobs? They won't even do school work. Most of these kids would be expelled, if possible, well before they turn 18 so under current child protection laws there are not very many jobs they could do. They will turn to stealing, robbing and drug dealing.
GuzziJohn

what makes you think i care if they do those jobs
that  IS the problem
it  is not made clear to them   they will starve if they don't do right

oh ya....i forgot
some do-gooder  will furnish a safety net 
so they can continue a worthless  life at some one elses expence

[45-70.gov]

also....
small classes are  needed  so a bad student  disrupts a smaller number of good students

cull the bad  ones and a class can  have  40 kids

[XD40SC]

It's hard to get anywhere when people spend so much of their time just trying to insult the other person.  If logic supports your ideas you should not need to be calling people names... jmho  Others aren't capable of thinking for themselves so they just keep regurgitating the crap they see on cable news (which channel depends on who you want feeding you your thoughts).  For the less thoughtful it is simply too easy to hitch your thoughts to someone else, except that you never develop the fundamental understanding you might have if you came up with it yourself.  Anyway, that's the way America is today...

I for one agree with you 100%.

[XD40SC]

What you are asking is the very basis for many people's objection to the union.  That being, that the amount of compensation does not equal the fair market value for that set of skills.  Part of the problem is the absurd idea that all teachers are worth the same amount to both society and the students (theoretically, the customers).  But they aren't.  Find a random kid who works hard but is just a high school grad and he could make a find PE teacher.  It's going to take much more than that to fill the AP Chemistry and Calc. teacher positions.  It's a simple fact that one is more in demand and less in supply.

So the answer is that you pay whatever it takes.  That's what those people are worth.  If it costs you 250k a year to get a teacher capable of teaching Calc, (and it won't) then that's what you pay, because that is what that person brings on the open market.  If it costs you 22k a year to get a 6th grade history teacher (and it might be about that) that's what you pay that person because that's what that person's skills are worth on the open market.

The reality is that some people bring more to the profession than others, those people deserve to be paid as such.  Compensation should be tied to actual value.  When it's not you get backlash against the unions from people who have to actually prove their worth in the open market every day.

Good idea but who would decide their value. Sure a science or higher math teacher may be worth more money. How would one determine the worth of elementary teachers. What they teach is elementry, but these are the formative years. How does one measure their worth?

[Buckskin]

What you are asking is the very basis for many people's objection to the union.  That being, that the amount of compensation does not equal the fair market value for that set of skills.  Part of the problem is the absurd idea that all teachers are worth the same amount to both society and the students (theoretically, the customers).  But they aren't.  Find a random kid who works hard but is just a high school grad and he could make a find PE teacher.  It's going to take much more than that to fill the AP Chemistry and Calc. teacher positions.  It's a simple fact that one is more in demand and less in supply.

So the answer is that you pay whatever it takes.  That's what those people are worth.  If it costs you 250k a year to get a teacher capable of teaching Calc, (and it won't) then that's what you pay, because that is what that person brings on the open market.  If it costs you 22k a year to get a 6th grade history teacher (and it might be about that) that's what you pay that person because that's what that person's skills are worth on the open market.

The reality is that some people bring more to the profession than others, those people deserve to be paid as such.  Compensation should be tied to actual value.  When it's not you get backlash against the unions from people who have to actually prove their worth in the open market every day.

Good idea but who would decide their value. Sure a science or higher math teacher may be worth more money. How would one determine the worth of elementary teachers. What they teach is elementry, but these are the formative years. How does one measure their worth?

Supply and demand just like every other profession.  There is no reason to have unions anymore.  If your capable of doing a job your capable of asking for a raise when warranted.  OSHA takes care of worker safety, unions are obsolete... The only purpose for them is filling donkey coffers...

[dukkillr]

What you are asking is the very basis for many people's objection to the union.  That being, that the amount of compensation does not equal the fair market value for that set of skills.  Part of the problem is the absurd idea that all teachers are worth the same amount to both society and the students (theoretically, the customers).  But they aren't.  Find a random kid who works hard but is just a high school grad and he could make a find PE teacher.  It's going to take much more than that to fill the AP Chemistry and Calc. teacher positions.  It's a simple fact that one is more in demand and less in supply.

So the answer is that you pay whatever it takes.  That's what those people are worth.  If it costs you 250k a year to get a teacher capable of teaching Calc, (and it won't) then that's what you pay, because that is what that person brings on the open market.  If it costs you 22k a year to get a 6th grade history teacher (and it might be about that) that's what you pay that person because that's what that person's skills are worth on the open market.

The reality is that some people bring more to the profession than others, those people deserve to be paid as such.  Compensation should be tied to actual value.  When it's not you get backlash against the unions from people who have to actually prove their worth in the open market every day.

Good idea but who would decide their value. Sure a science or higher math teacher may be worth more money. How would one determine the worth of elementary teachers. What they teach is elementry, but these are the formative years. How does one measure their worth?

Lets see...  Lets say I need to hire an 3rd grade teacher.  I would set a minimum guideline of requirements although they would not be hard rules.  Things like a degree in early childhood ed, reasonably intelligent, experience (both work and school), and any special requirements of the specific position (like if it's in the inner city or Nome, Alaska the ideal candidates would be different).  Then I would assign a value that I think would bring me applicants of the quality I was looking for, and able to afford.  One of two things is going to happen.  Either people I want apply for my position or they don't.  If they don't, I'll need to raise the compensation or adjust the terms somehow.  If they do, I'll probably lower the terms slightly next time until the market stabilizes.  Then once it's established what amount brings the people we want, we've made it into the free market.  I honestly don't understand why this is hard to fathom, it's what every other industry already does.

[DDZ]

The school districts could set base salaries for new hires then raises or no raises would be based on merit. Also school districts would have to be able to fire teachers that they felt did not perform well. Of coarse for this to happen unions would have to be gone, because unions are all about making everyone equal, and they make it almost impossible for a school district to fire a teacher.  With the threat of no raise or being fired, teachers would strive to do a better job. Its called incentive. Give them incentive to do a good job. With unionized teachers, that incentive is taken away. Its the reason we have the problem we are talking about.
  Its not all about intelligence either. There are many people that may not be the most intelligent but perform a much better job than so called intelligent people. Its because some just have more will, drive, and desire to do the best job they can. I have seen people deemed intelligent, but are lazy as lazy can be. So really what good is their intelligence?


     

[XD40SC]

The school districts could set base salaries for new hires then raises or no raises would be based on merit. Also school districts would have to be able to fire teachers that they felt did not perform well. Of coarse for this to happen unions would have to be gone, because unions are all about making everyone equal, and they make it almost impossible for a school district to fire a teacher.  With the threat of no raise or being fired, teachers would strive to do a better job. Its called incentive. Give them incentive to do a good job. With unionized teachers, that incentive is taken away. Its the reason we have the problem we are talking about.
  Its not all about intelligence either. There are many people that may not be the most intelligent but perform a much better job than so called intelligent people. Its because some just have more will, drive, and desire to do the best job they can. I have seen people deemed intelligent, but are lazy as lazy can be. So really what good is their intelligence?


   

I've seen very intellegent people who couldn't teach a darn. Alot of them in college as profs. I know of teachers who graduated with B averages who were excellent teachers. Sometime they can relate better to the students learning styles.

As for merit pay- How would that be determined?

[dukkillr]

As for merit pay- How would that be determined?

You and I covered this right here on Feb 24th.  It was about the time you started trying to find something to be offended by each time I posted...

http://www.gboreloaded.com/forums/index.php/topic,227932.msg1099267912.html#msg1099267912

As for intelligence?  I've always figured that was some measure of a person's top potential.  Simply put, if two people have the same work ethic and background a person with more intelligence is capable of doing more.  Can smart people be lazy?  Sure, just like dumb people can.  But a hard working idiot is always going to be limited by his intelligence.  A hardworking and brilliant person can be a dynamic force in any job on the planet.  Plus I've always personally enjoyed being around people that stretch my own thoughts...

[XD40SC]

I tried explaining why I was offended. If you don't understand, I can't make it any simplier.