One of the reasons I started South Shore Piano School was to do things different.
To build a school where the pay and benefits for teachers could actually be…exciting.
To create a school where the people, both students and teachers, come first. And things like nice buildings will come as our population grows, because we did a good job in our work. That’s the hope, anyway.
Because it doesn’t work like that most other community music schools. Administrators and school owners get pretty nasty with me over this discussion.
And I suppose I understand why. It’s a long-standing system. A long-standing systems tend to be fiercely defended.
For decades, the rationale for paying music teachers less than half of what students pay in, with few-to-no raises, is the cost of the overhead.
And of course, everyone knows bills need to be paid. There’s no argument there.
But, there are three factors missing from the discussion.
First, overhead is a factor the organization has a lot of control over. The same organization that denies teachers a $1-an-hour raise will hire two marketing VP’s at $80,000 a year and full benefits.
And keep them regardless of whether the marketing actually works.
Thus, increasing the cost of “overhead.”
Second, when the decision to pay teachers more always comes last, teachers don’t stick around.
There’s a cognitive dissonance when a teacher is paid less than half what the students are paying, the organization says it can’t afford to pay teachers more, and then it buys a $5 million building.
Third, when teachers leave, the education dwindles. Students are left to develop a new relationship from scratch with a new teacher. And then when that teacher leaves, the student goes elsewhere or decides to quit.
And with teachers being simultaneously underpaid and also the highest producer of income for the organization, that’s a dangerous game to play.
I’ve often wondered…if a teacher resignation costs the organization $40,000 in lost students, why not just give the teacher an extra $10,000 a year to stay? That math doesn’t make sense to most administrators.
When an organization is struggling to make ends meet, can’t keep teachers, and the education sucks, what’s the point of having an organization at all?
Up there with rising health insurance costs, it’s become a system that’s ingrained in our culture. But one that is in desperate need of change.
Because left untouched, the system leads to what broke out all over the news from the UCLA chemistry department. A new level of absurdity.
Most people know adjunct professors aren’t paid much. But imagine, UCLA posted for an adjunct position with no pay.
Now, maybe this was a misprint or a misunderstanding. Maybe there is some kind of compensation that’s simply not a “salary.”
But when you consider the cost of a college education, the fact this made it off the editor’s desk is unacceptable.
It’s yet another symptom of an education system that puts teacher pay last. But one that’s getting worse.
Which is why, as a society, we need to speak up, frequently, openly, and honestly, for higher pay and better treatment for teachers.
Because without teachers, we can’t have education.
And without education, we can’t advance as a society.
At least, in the ways we so desperately need to.
