Some of the most talented people around go into research science, where postdoc salaries start somewhere around $38,000 per year in year 1 and go up to $52,000 per year after 7 years on the job. So, after a BA, maybe an MS and PhD, they're willing to work their butts off 12 months of the year for a lot less than a teacher who got 380s on the GRE who gets three months or more off.
And scientists have no guarantee of finding permanent employment in academia. But if they do, they'll work even harder and will be assessed via grants and publications. Yes, there are problems with that system, but assessment --- especially via publications --- is an excellent way to set standards. This doesn't exist with teachers.
If teachers want to earn the kinds of salaries that software engineers get, they'll have to agree to being assessed first, and the quality of the teacher pool will have to jump dramatically. Somehow I doubt that engineers who scored 380 on the quantitative part of the GRE are pulling in $100K per year.
Mediocre teachers should get mediocre salaries. But...
If you're making this argument for highly qualified people, I agree! By this I mean, people with degrees in the subjects they want to teach (and a graduate degree in the subject for high school teachers), maybe with combined GRE scores over 1400, enthusiasm, and an ability to impart information. By all means, hire these people, pay them well, and reward them for doing a good job!
Last edited by Val; 01/21/12 12:33 PM. Reason: Clarity
