You Get What You Pay For

A few weeks ago I spent some time with you discussing the teacher salary proposal that is currently being debated in the legislature. This is noble work and I encourage the legislature to continue moving this ball down the field, and to do so with as much expediency as possible (while at the same time not forgetting about the SSA rate). Not only are we in the final stages of putting our budget for the next fiscal year together [sans SSA], hiring season has arrived. With growing enrollment, once again positions will be added to our faculty. It sure would be nice to tell them with certainty how much they can expect to earn. 

Indeed, it is somewhat difficult to unpack what are complex compensation proposals and explain them in simplistic terms that are easily understood. Or succinct enough to help those with opposing viewpoints comprehend the long term implications of those ideas without coming across as self-serving. This is most certainly a difficult needle to thread.

Here, those heady arguments have been laid out point by point, but without truly discerning the implications of what those decisions may mean for the students and communities we serve. Think of it this way. Last year when we were beginning the search for our next elementary principal I spent some time with the board considering what the salary range should be by first sharing with them the current metrics for our conference. The average elementary principal in our conference, at that time earned a salary of $97,149 per year. So we settled on a range of $95,000-$105,000. At the same time, I was also clear that we could probably find someone to do this work for $80,000-$85,000. But we had to ask, is that what we want? Remember, this person is expected to lead our elementary school.

Currently we are engaged in a search for our next Tech Director. Naively, I posted that position with a salary range of $45,000-$65,000. After some research and watching the pool develop, I realized that the job description simply did not match the salary range. Let's assume I hire someone for $50,000 and the network goes down. At that point, we don't have a lot of time for on the job training. But the reality is, that's what you get for $50,000.

Teachers are no different. We can hire a teacher right out of college and pay them $33,500, which is the statewide minimum. I'll ask the same question that I asked before. Is this what we want? Remember, this person is expected to teach our students how to read. That is the primary reason why our starting teaching salary is more than $10,000 higher than the statewide minimum. 

But here is the other part of the problem: many young people studying to be teachers are not planning to stay in Iowa. Pay is some of, but not the only reason for this loss of talent. If the legislature can get the base salary to $50,000 for starting teachers, then I would opine we've won half the battle. (Mind you, I'm skeptical this is even realistic; particularly considering counter proposals from the Senate and House are $46,251 and $47,000 respectively.) 

The other 'half of the battle' so to speak is to make certain these young professionals feel value beyond the paycheck. They need the support of supplemental and auxiliary services that organizations like the AEA can provide. The autonomy to make decisions in their classrooms without fear of reprisal. A voice at the table. I could go on, but you get the point, right?