I think you'll find that the superintendent of schools and the administration takes home the lions share. In New York state you can look all that up easily online. Not sure for DC though. A friend is a teacher and the superintendent of schools for his district makes around $250,000 per year
The administrators the home the lions share per capita. The number of administrators as a ratio has been going way up. What do they even do that's so important?
I think you'll find that the superintendent of schools and the administration takes home the lions share. In New York state you can look all that up easily online. Not sure for DC though. A friend is a teacher and the superintendent of schools for his district makes around $250,000 per year
Not at all true. It's the teachers.
There are only one or two superintendent of school systems.
There are hundreds of teachers
The administrators the home the lions share per capita. The number of administrators as a ratio has been going way up. What do they even do that's so important?
Again, this is patently false. Not in a single state do administrators take home more money than teachers considering the whole district.
Simply put there are just more teachers. Admins may have a higher salary but there is a fraction of them compared to teachers.
I'm not here to blow smoke up your ass, but to set things straight.
I'm not sure how else to explain this to you.
So here's a picture driven by 2016 state budget data:
https://chart-studio.plotly.com/~governing/963/instruction-employee-salaries-instruction-employee-benefits-pupil-support-instru/?share_key=uSdNUubPpOI0tmpmUhYod9#/
Red is your argument for lion share
Blue is my argument for lion share.
Red are administrators and Blue are teachers. Do you notice which one is a larger portion?
Simple example to help you understand more clearly, if pictures aren't your thing:
100 teachers making 75,000 per year (Likely) VS 10 admin making 300,000 per year. (Unlikely)
I'll let you run the numbers on that.