So, what is the market rate for a good chemistry teacher, Mrs. Truitt?
One would have to ask that question of the candidate for state superintendent after some comments she made in a recent candidates’ discussion with the Public Schools Forum of NC.
So, how would the market value for that chemistry teacher be found?
Comparing a public school chemistry teacher’s salary to the salary of a chemistry teacher in the private sector? At a private school? Neighboring states?
Exactly where would one find a market value for chemistry teachers outside of other public schools unless Truitt was making a play at an extreme uptick in lateral entry positions whose salaries could be individually negotiated.
Now that would create a cohesive, noncompetitive, low-turnover rate in our schools.
Truitt’s “suggestion” is at best ignorant.
Teachers are among some of the only state employees who are paid on a set salary schedule that does not carry a “minimum” and “maximum” pay range for experience and market viability.
From a recent salary plan report for NC:
What are CRR, JMR, and ARR? Well, here is a “dictionary of career-banding terms.“
Oh, and there’s the MMR:
But those things do not apply to teachers. Why? Because there really is no market for teachers outside of public schools that is sizable enough to compare, so the state gets to treat teachers differently. And they have.
Maybe Truitt could advance the dialogue of restoring some things like graduate degree pay bumps and longevity pay for teachers. When the market looks at advanced degrees and training as worthy of pay raises or increases in compensation, then the state would have to look at how it can “recuit” and “retain.”
But in the case of teachers, they took away graduate degree pay bumps.
To go along with no more longevity pay.
Under a governor for whom Truitt served as an advisor.
Maybe is she wants to look at “market-value,” she could start here?