No, if I am on the management/board my first priority is my staff because if you get that right the rest follows. Teaching might be a vocation (and it is for me) but my job is most definitely not a vocation. Treat your staff right just like you would in any field and they will look after the rest of it.
British School of Manila pays tons more (and did before the dollar fell) so it's got little to do with the tuition they can charge or the nature of the country. BSM, ISKL, SAS, JIS all pay well because they understand why they should.
"If the retention of teacher is high and they are attracting candidates that they are satisfied with, why should they have higher salaries?" - I think this question answers itself. There are many very good gigs in schools that don't pay so well but many of them can and should pay better - it usually comes down to sound financial management. As a boss you first priority should never ever be the student or the institution it should be your colleagues just like it would be if you were the boss of a profit making company, a hospital, a military unit, a brothel or anything else.
Questions about the International School of Manila
I have to disagree on many points from experience. You can get the best staff in the world, if they don't have the right clay and environment, it's not going to work either. If the kids are rotten, the staff will leave even if the pay is adequate. Also in my opinion, you don't get the best staff by offering higher pay, you do it by offering great working conditions which I outlined in my previous post. You keep talking about the British school's salary. Are class sizes the same? Ancillary services the same? Do they get better teacher retention? There are way more questions to be asked besides the dollars. There's also a difference between being able to charge more tuition and wanting to do that. It can alter the make up of the school and as I said before long waiting lists mean better students and happier teachers.
Treating your staff right doesn't necessarily mean throwing money at them either... How is it sound financial management to give pay rise if you have high retention and good teachers??? As for priorities, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I think students come first and always will, I don't think there's a right or wrong answer since it's about values. For example if I had to decide between a raise to teachers with an increase in class size or salary freeze and maintain class sizes, I would choose the latter. The choice has to be what's going to benefit the education of students the most. I can replace some disgruntled teachers easily but larger issues like class size and environment are key. Most teachers will not leave to make a few thousand dollars more if the school environment is great and to those that want to leave to make three thousand more, I open the door and say goodbye and good luck
Treating your staff right doesn't necessarily mean throwing money at them either... How is it sound financial management to give pay rise if you have high retention and good teachers??? As for priorities, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I think students come first and always will, I don't think there's a right or wrong answer since it's about values. For example if I had to decide between a raise to teachers with an increase in class size or salary freeze and maintain class sizes, I would choose the latter. The choice has to be what's going to benefit the education of students the most. I can replace some disgruntled teachers easily but larger issues like class size and environment are key. Most teachers will not leave to make a few thousand dollars more if the school environment is great and to those that want to leave to make three thousand more, I open the door and say goodbye and good luck
Yeh I agree there's always a balance to be struck. It's not about throwing money at it. There are schools that pay the big bucks but fail to deliver on other fronts. But the priority should always be the staff (from highly paid expat teachers to low paid maintenance staff and cleaners). The package should be as good as it can be to attract the best. It should also, along with the environment, be good enough to retain the best. Staff should always come first because they are a schools greatest resource and should be valued as such.
[quote]A school isn't for teachers to make money[/quote]
This is just a silly statement, GHK. I would never apologize for expecting to be paid well for a service that I provide at a high level. If you believe this, GHZ, then you are in the minority and should perhaps devote your life to volunteer work. This might ease your guilty conscience for asking to be PAID for your work. :lol:
Getting back to the subject- I think MobyDick voiced the most balanced opinion on the matter. Any competent administrator will tell you that THE most important aspect of a quality school is the staff. You can "throw" all the materials, laptops, and facilities you want at students, and it will not raise achievement if the staff is mediocre or suspect.
To infer that a school is not "putting the students first" because they are paying their teachers well is absurd and sounds like Admin-speak. I put this question out to everyone- Do schools like ISKL, Shanghai, Tokyo, Taipei, and JIS "put their kids first" even though they offer their teachers good salaries and benes? I do not believe that it is mutually exclusive, unlike GHK, who apparently does.
This is just a silly statement, GHK. I would never apologize for expecting to be paid well for a service that I provide at a high level. If you believe this, GHZ, then you are in the minority and should perhaps devote your life to volunteer work. This might ease your guilty conscience for asking to be PAID for your work. :lol:
Getting back to the subject- I think MobyDick voiced the most balanced opinion on the matter. Any competent administrator will tell you that THE most important aspect of a quality school is the staff. You can "throw" all the materials, laptops, and facilities you want at students, and it will not raise achievement if the staff is mediocre or suspect.
To infer that a school is not "putting the students first" because they are paying their teachers well is absurd and sounds like Admin-speak. I put this question out to everyone- Do schools like ISKL, Shanghai, Tokyo, Taipei, and JIS "put their kids first" even though they offer their teachers good salaries and benes? I do not believe that it is mutually exclusive, unlike GHK, who apparently does.
Very easy to twist words and understand what you wish and ignore all the points being raised because like a child you feel slighted. I never said that being paid well is a bad thing and I have worked for 100KUS a year and happily took it to the bank without a guilty conscience. The school could afford it and was also managed well and I had no problems with it.
What I do say if that if you don't like a school's salary, don't go or leave. I also said that the salary which you focused on is only a small factor in determining whether it's a good place to work. ISM is being criticized here for having a lower pay package and yet no one has talked about class sizes, teaching minutes, materials, facilities, quality of students, student services etc...
Sure a school should pay its teachers fairly because if they don't, they'll incur high turnover and high recruiting costs but to just compare salary is ludicrous.
Same with a statement like the staff is the most imortant resource and should be paid the most a school can afford. What does that mean when you have to make choices? Money is a finite resource and in most cases, schools mostly rely on tuition. Here's a real scenario in front of you. The US dollars has slid upwards of 20% against many currencies in recent years. For example a canadian working in HK would have lost 20% of his canadian purchasing power by working there since 2002 and because the economy had been recovering slowly with all the problems, salaries had not increased much until recently, some had been cut others had been frozen.
Some teachers complained about their wages. What does a school do? Raise tuitions by 20% at a time of low economic growth and risk losing students therefore possibly have to let go some teachers? Augment class sizes to pay teachers more? Fire or not renew contracts of full time AD, psychologists, counselors, nurses? Get rid of Middle School and have only two principals? Reduce the number of teachers having responsibility allowances? Augment teaching minutes to have less staff? Forget about building the new swimming pool that will benefit staff, students and the community? Here's a good one...get rid of old expensive teachers and hire young ones. So are you saying that the board should put teachers salary at the very top of their list?
In the real world, most school board look at what's best for the institution as a whole and that requires balance and yes the staff is a very important resource. It's good to have a board that is objective and are not only made from parents but also have representation from outside.
If it happens that you have a reasonable retention rate and are still attracting quality candidates to replace the ones leaving then most boards/admin will say bye bye whiners, the school will be better off with teachers that want to be there.
What I say is that a school usually tries to do what's best for the institution and that has to be a balance where teachers are happy, facilities are nice and students are high quality. What will make teachers happy is a lot more than just $$$. Do you think that the poor retention rate of teachers in the US is due to low salaries? Everyone knows what they're going to be paid when they get in... Of course if the staff is mediocre, the school will be bad but higher salaries DO NOT necessarily equate better staff and if you think so then you are insulting a lot of people working in schools in Latin America or Africa or in the public school system all around the world. If a school's retention rate is high and they are recruiting good candidates...Would you argue that the staff is likely to be unhappy and mediocre? Since you like extreme scenarios...Do you think that if you paid high salaries and had crappy students(like some MidEast schools), you would get high teacher retention and these fine teachers would make the students all better? Remember that when you have hight tuition fees, you're likely to get high profile parents and those kids can be very difficult to manage sometimes.
What I do say if that if you don't like a school's salary, don't go or leave. I also said that the salary which you focused on is only a small factor in determining whether it's a good place to work. ISM is being criticized here for having a lower pay package and yet no one has talked about class sizes, teaching minutes, materials, facilities, quality of students, student services etc...
Sure a school should pay its teachers fairly because if they don't, they'll incur high turnover and high recruiting costs but to just compare salary is ludicrous.
Same with a statement like the staff is the most imortant resource and should be paid the most a school can afford. What does that mean when you have to make choices? Money is a finite resource and in most cases, schools mostly rely on tuition. Here's a real scenario in front of you. The US dollars has slid upwards of 20% against many currencies in recent years. For example a canadian working in HK would have lost 20% of his canadian purchasing power by working there since 2002 and because the economy had been recovering slowly with all the problems, salaries had not increased much until recently, some had been cut others had been frozen.
Some teachers complained about their wages. What does a school do? Raise tuitions by 20% at a time of low economic growth and risk losing students therefore possibly have to let go some teachers? Augment class sizes to pay teachers more? Fire or not renew contracts of full time AD, psychologists, counselors, nurses? Get rid of Middle School and have only two principals? Reduce the number of teachers having responsibility allowances? Augment teaching minutes to have less staff? Forget about building the new swimming pool that will benefit staff, students and the community? Here's a good one...get rid of old expensive teachers and hire young ones. So are you saying that the board should put teachers salary at the very top of their list?
In the real world, most school board look at what's best for the institution as a whole and that requires balance and yes the staff is a very important resource. It's good to have a board that is objective and are not only made from parents but also have representation from outside.
If it happens that you have a reasonable retention rate and are still attracting quality candidates to replace the ones leaving then most boards/admin will say bye bye whiners, the school will be better off with teachers that want to be there.
What I say is that a school usually tries to do what's best for the institution and that has to be a balance where teachers are happy, facilities are nice and students are high quality. What will make teachers happy is a lot more than just $$$. Do you think that the poor retention rate of teachers in the US is due to low salaries? Everyone knows what they're going to be paid when they get in... Of course if the staff is mediocre, the school will be bad but higher salaries DO NOT necessarily equate better staff and if you think so then you are insulting a lot of people working in schools in Latin America or Africa or in the public school system all around the world. If a school's retention rate is high and they are recruiting good candidates...Would you argue that the staff is likely to be unhappy and mediocre? Since you like extreme scenarios...Do you think that if you paid high salaries and had crappy students(like some MidEast schools), you would get high teacher retention and these fine teachers would make the students all better? Remember that when you have hight tuition fees, you're likely to get high profile parents and those kids can be very difficult to manage sometimes.
-
curiousteacher
- Posts: 7
- Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2007 4:37 pm
If GHK = Gerry Keener you can ignore everything he says. He was head of school in Saigon for far too many years and ran it with total incompetence. I'd actually be surprised if it is Gerry because GHK's posts are far too articulate and he appears to be speaking from a perspective Gerry Keener lacked--that of an educator (or at least one who has a vague notion of what makes a school run. On second thought, though, all those references to charitable work sound suspiciously familiar...throw in a couple references to doing god's work and now we're talkin' Gerry Keener talk)
Obviously ISM attracts and maintains a teaching staff with which the powers that be are satisfied. I know that International School Bangkok starts teachers at a max of 53,000USD and tops out close to 80K and gives free housing and a great retirement--up to 30% a year starting from year one (school pays 15% and staff can do 2-15%). I've heard this is close to double what other international schools in Bangkok pay. Not sure about cost of living in Thailand but I've visited there and if you "go local" eating wise anyhow it seems pretty dang cheap.
Obviously ISM attracts and maintains a teaching staff with which the powers that be are satisfied. I know that International School Bangkok starts teachers at a max of 53,000USD and tops out close to 80K and gives free housing and a great retirement--up to 30% a year starting from year one (school pays 15% and staff can do 2-15%). I've heard this is close to double what other international schools in Bangkok pay. Not sure about cost of living in Thailand but I've visited there and if you "go local" eating wise anyhow it seems pretty dang cheap.
What references to charitable work are you talking about exactly? Is working for 25-30K a year charitable work? I guess the teaching profession is in dire straits if all are such poor readers. I have done some administration but went back to teaching because I hate paperwork, whiny teachers and parents and I prefer to deal with students because I can do my thing and have fun without being bothered. As to God's work, I dislike bible thumpers and would never work in a religious school as I am a firm believer in keeping religion out of schools on an organized basis. So I guess I can't be Gerry Keener whoever that is...