Over the years, I have been writing about misconceptions regarding the schooling process. The purpose of these posts is to explain why I disagree with various comments that I have heard people make about schooling. These are meant as personal thoughts rather than conclusive proof, and I will admit that I'm not always the best at explaining my thoughts. Regardless, I have decided that I should be willing to share these posts when I encounter someone online who makes an argument that I have already discussed.
On average, teachers earn less than similarly credentialed workers. This has frequently been referred to as either the teacher pay penalty or the teacher wage penalty. Teachers have been using this information as proof that they are underpaid. While the numbers they provide may be accurate, their interpretation is not.
The teacher pay penalty is entirely reliant on the flawed and inequitable concept of credentialism. Teachers are insisting that they should be paid based on the acquisition of a piece of paper rather than the actual value of their work. There are numerous flaws to this mindset.
Among the problems with pay according to credentials is that this is detrimental to economic mobility. Degrees require an investment of time, money, and effort. Money is perhaps the most obvious issue with this approach. A salary is something that should be earned, not bought.
Even if we completely subsidized all forms of schooling, those who are disadvantaged would still be disproportionately harmed. They are less likely to forgo an income, especially when we are driving up the cost of living. We also need to keep in mind the implications of credential inflation. As I have repeatedly stated, those with limited means will not win in a credentialist arms race.
Time and effort are also more difficult for disadvantaged families. Time and effort is a more substantial investment for those who can't pay someone to do work for them such as caring for their families or for tools to automate important tasks. They may also need to work longer or take extra jobs just to make ends meet.
I'm going to say something else that I keep repeating. There is nothing that can be learned in school that can't be learned elsewhere. In fact, most people learn best outside of the schools. Pay based on credentials legitimately provides a strong disincentive for individuals to pursue the educations that are right for them.
Of course, I have already written about credentialism. There's more to the teacher pay penalty than the obvious deficiencies of credentialism. For example, not all degrees are the same. There are a lot of credentialed individuals who make a lot less than teachers.
To date, I have only seen one study that has evaluated teacher pay on anything other than credentials. Admittedly, I saw some flaws. Regardless, it doesn't make teachers look good that the lone study I have seen that looks past credentialism says that teachers are overpaid.
I have already discussed why I believe teachers are overpaid. I don't think that's technically necessary here. Regardless of whether or not teachers are overpaid, it's absurd to use credentialism as the measure. Again, this is a flawed and inequitable concept. Teachers will not sway me by using their credentials as the sole argument for higher pay.
No comments:
Post a Comment