Hacker News Reader

That sounds like a great life-work balance, but it also sounds like a privileged position that is unrealistic for many teachers. My girlfriend teaches art to kids aged 8-14 at an urban public school, and she has zero time during the day for lesson planning, grading, seating plans, hanging up artwork, dealing with parents, etc. On most days she has to stay behind for several hours, and she often works throughout the weekend. She doesn't get paid overtime (nor does the school offer health insurance or 401(k)) because she's technically a contractor -- the school can't afford full time hires -- and she constantly has to spend her own money on supplies and materials for her classes. Refusing to work outside work hours would be career suicide, pretty much.

What does the her schedule look like exactly? She's in the classroom teaching for 8 hours straight (minus lunch)?

This reads a lot like people who make excuses for not having time to exercise. I get that some positions will require you to put in work outside of work hours, but to say 'has zero time' seems like a bit of an excuse.

Not the OP, but my wife is a teacher and has one 50 minute prep during her day. She teaches 7 different classes. Most days the school can't find enough substitute teachers and she ends up having to sub for another class during her one prep hour.

Well, that's actually true in a lot of schools in the US -- over lunch you have cafeteria duty and right after school there's the patrolling pick-up/busses and the after school clubs...

She has a short (45min?) planning period to start her day with her co-teacher, but as I understand it, it's nowhere enough. After that, her classes run back to back, yes. She has one meager lunch break lasting something like 15 minutes -- she actually started drinking Soylent for lunch because she doesn't have time for anything more complicated than that plus an apple. She gets up at 6:30am and doesn't really take time to eat breakfast either. It all sounds unbelievably stressful to me. It's very different from my own privileged life as a software developer.

Damn, that's pretty ridiculous. Teachers have it a lot better in Canada from what I gather. At least in my area.

At least in America, most teachers are expected to take home work and spend a large portion of time outside of the strict 6-8 school day doing lesson planning, grading, etc.

Their wages are quickly approaching what you would expect at a fry cook position yet Wendy's doesn't give you four hours of extra homework a night.

We are headed for a giant education crisis because we overwork and underpay under-qualified teachers.

Those of us who cannot afford to keep their kids in private or home school will have it rough finding quality education for their kids.

All of the most successful teachers I had placed tight boundaries on when they worked. They were organized, fast, and efficient. One history teacher I had only ever gave essay tests. He would have them all graded by 4pm. As one class was taking the exam, he would grade the previous class's essays. He had been a colonel in the army, and so had learned how to be ruthlessly efficient. One of the best teachers I had. Similarly, had a neighbor who had been a colonel and became a realtor when he retired. He way outworked everyone else, including realtors with many years of experience. He was accustomed to slamming through all the paperwork quickly and carried that to his realtor gig.

I have known many teachers who were never trained to be efficient or organized, and who did not anticipate the paperwork load that comes with the job. They would struggle under the paperwork load due to this.

But, what do we expect from a system run by government administrators with little or no transparency or accountability. The administrators pile on the paperwork, because that is what means quality to them. That is what they do.

> All of the most successful teachers I had placed tight boundaries on when they worked. They were organized, fast, and efficient.

You're describing efficient people. Unfortunately we do not properly train our teachers because we do not want to properly pay them.

> sounds like a privileged position that is unrealistic for many teachers

Well sure, he lives in Australia which has much, much better working conditions than the USA.

It sounds like your girlfriend is being taken advantage of and working in a situation that is not to her benefit. In which case she needs to start looking for a new job!

In which case nobody would be teaching the kids art. Of course she's being taken advantage of, she's a teacher in 21st century western civilization.

The comment you are replying to mentions a teacher who doesn’t seem to be being taken advantage of. Your comment seems to imply that all teachers in 21st century western civilisation are taken advantage of. Do you mean that the Australian teacher mentioned is still being taken advantage of, or that Australia is not western civilisation (or that they are not working in the 21st century)?

Americans like to deny the outside world exists, and that in many ways it's much better than America. It's a strange way to behave, rather than learning what they can improve in their own society.

I wouldn't say she's being taken advantage of. This is a city school in a depressed area, everyone is overwhelmed (she has several hundred students across her classes), and working with near-zero budgets.

There just isn't work available within a reasonable commute distance. She'd have to move if she wanted better conditions.

> She'd have to move if she wanted better conditions

There you go. Do what it takes to improve your work-life. I moved from one perfectly good First World country to another, because I wanted a different life. It was difficult and took a long time, but it was absolutely worth it.

It's not unique to teaching. Your employer will take from you as much as you will give. Worse, your insane hours and effort eventually become the expected minimum. To prevent this, many years ago I started setting the timer to 8 hours and 30 minutes (the latter is to account for lunch). Once the timer beeps, I get up and GTFO. No matter what. This works great.

I've found that's how I have to do it, too. Best decision I ever made was moving an hour away from where I worked too. I never see kids out anywhere, and never feel pressure to not do things I enjoy that might be looked down on in a rural conservative community (drinking, mostly). I also never really have to deal with seeing students out so no awkward convos there, either. And it gives me time to wake up in the morning and prepare as well as dissociate from it in the evening.

I also always try to leave at 3:20,which is when we're free (7:30-3:20,tho I usually get there early to copy).

Work life is great, and I don't do anything in my breaks, either. But I'm still looking to get out for various other reasons I've documented elsewhere.

That’s, assuming you work 48 weeks a year, 20 full days spent in transportation though...

To be honest, I find it worth it. I can use the time to listen to podcasts and generally just unwind, or I can use it to prepare. I tried living in the area for a while, and it was just awful. Seeing students everywhere I went got old quick, especially cause they would awkwardly stare and such, as if they couldn't imagine teachers having lives outside of school. It was the worst at the gym, especially if I wanted to try to swim or go to the sauna. And, of course, I can mention having the parents complain about me as a teacher because I dared drink "the devil's water" with supper at a restaurant!

Now, I don't have to worry about any of that, get cheaper rent and better internet (it ends up being cheaper even when gas/maintenance is factored in, as well), as well as live in a fairly vibrant college town that has a lot of options on things to do. Plus, I can listen to podcasts and music to learn/unwind on my way to and from work. Just mentally for me it's well worth it.

ever since i discovered podcasts, audiodrama and audiobooks i stopped dreading a long commute. on the contrary, i now look forward to it, because those 2-3 hours are the most quiet of the day. and while i was an avid reader in my youth, i haven't read any books for decades until recently. now i average a book per month.

I had a teacher like that in high school. He taught AP/Honors government and had some of the highest pass rates for any teacher in the school. He stayed after school for a fixed time - 30 or 45 minutes - no longer - and most of that was spent with students. It took him FOREVER to grade tests and assignments. But, he was one of the best teachers I had in those 4 years and I, along with most of my peers, aced both exams that year (he did AP US gov in one semester and AP comparative gov in the other).

Presumably the backpresure of requests does not go away - when parents email for information, they do not stop just because they didn’t get a response. They will reach out through other methods. Do you know how that irreducible workload gets resolved, other than getting passed to colleagues who do put in extra effort/hours?

Non-American here: what happens if the teacher just flatly says no/doesn't answer the emails/calls etc? Are lawsuits against teachers over grades an actual thing in the US now? (In Europe or Australia you'd be laughed out of court for even trying.)

No such lawsuits are not a thing. I’m sure people threaten it. But it doesn’t happen.

That said, the teachers do have a responsibility to respond to parents. But they should never give in to helicopter parent special requests for extra credit.

> That said, the teachers do have a responsibility to respond to parents

Are you sure about that?

In my opinion the teachers have a responsibility to do the best damn job they can teaching their students. Meetings, parent emails and "admin paperwork", etc. are all a distant second.

I know my brother pushes back against it, and just says there are not enough hours in the day to respond to the requests of the hundreds of parents of all of his students.

> Presumably the backpresure of requests does not go away

If a teacher's work email is anything like my email inbox at work, ~90% of emails just go away if ignored. The other ~10% email again if it's actually important.

Once your contacts are "trained" not to expect instant feedback to every email they send you, you can often get some actual work done.

This is often the case for internal comms in a large company overran with administrators / coordinators. Yet parents are more like customers than colleagues - and no operation can ignore 90% of external / customer comms and stay alive (to say nothing of effective!)

Parents aren’t customers in a government school. Customers pay money. Parents are stakeholders, along with teachers, the teachers union and local politicians who compete for teachers votes. Children are not stakeholders because they have no power and their opinions are irrelevant.

A government school has an enormous advantage over private schools in that it’s free at the point of use. You can be a lot worse than the competition if the competition is expensive and you’re paid for by tax money.

Parents in competitive school districts also shell out exorbitant sums, both in property taxes and during school fundraisers.

It has given rise to a bargaining mentality.

Schools get money for each student enrolled, so there is a strong incentive to please parents so they don't move their kids (to a charter school etc). That seems fair enough to me in principle, but due to unrealistic demands, it can fail at times. Nonetheless it is better than a one-size-fits-all no child left behind policy. So charter schools create the competition in a district, and at least put pressure to raise the level of all the public schools.

> Children are not stakeholders because they have no power and their opinions are irrelevant

I think I see your point of view, but IMO that is too narrow a definition of "stakeholder".

One of the more commonly-accepted definitions of "stakeholder", at least from a project-management standpoint, would be:

"an individual, group, or organization, who may affect, be affected by, or perceive itself to be affected by a decision, activity, or outcome of a project"

Even in my work, I tend to think of stakeholders as those who stand to lose or gain based on the outcome -- literally, those who have a stake in the outcome. Many of them are active participants, but not always.

Just my 2 cents... I might be far from typical in this viewpoint.

I completely agree, this works even in workplace scenarios. Do not create lofty expectations as you will be forced to live up to them. Sometimes it's just your brain seeking those shots of dopamine.

> Presumably the backpresure of requests does not go away

It does. If the matter is actually important/urgent he will call a parent to speak to them directly, or the matter can be discussed at the next parent/teacher interview.

The unimportant ones go away.

It doesn’t sound like you’re in America. My sister is a teacher here and if she behaved that way she’d be fired immediately.