Calling all Teachers: A question about my education

[Beard in the Sky]

I am a High School English teacher in South Carolina.

The first thing you should consider is that a Masters degree is a Masters degree in public education. I would -strongly- recommend that you at least consider pursuing a Masters in Teaching (M.A.T.) which both certifies you to teach AND allows you to be paid on the Masters level (about 10k a year more on average). I have an M.A. in English Lit from USC and am paid not a penny more than if I held an M.A.T. despite the fact that my degree was much harder to obtain and the latter can usually be gotten in a year or so. That being said, I found it EASIER to get a job with a M.A. than some folks I know who have only a B.A. With the amount of accountability legislation that has been passed by both states and at the federal level, most schools want the most qualified teachers they can get, period.

A final piece of advice... one doesn't teach history, one teaches students. (I say this to anyone considering public education). Anyone who teaches for love of a subject only will be miserable when confronted with the shocking degree of need many of our students display. The average person on the street, despite having graduated from public school, has NO idea what goes on in our schools and you are certainly not prepared for it by any education program. I love my job, but not because I love my subject... though having a love of both the kids and the stuff is the best possible scenario.

 

[Queen_Dopplepopolis]

A final piece of advice... one doesn't teach history, one teaches students. (I say this to anyone considering public education). Anyone who teaches for love of a subject only will be miserable when confronted with the shocking degree of need many of our students display. The average person on the street, despite having graduated from public school, has NO idea what goes on in our schools and you are certainly not prepared for it by any education program. I love my job, but not because I love my subject... though having a love of both the kids and the stuff is the best possible scenario.

I do love history... but, for as long as I have had a career goal, it has been to teach... because I love high school, I love high school students... and that is why I want to be able to write on the side-- it allows me to indulge my incredible love of the study of history... and balance it with my desire to teach.

 

[Ycore Rixle]

I teach high school physics at an upscale independent (private) school in New York City.

My advice, for what it's worth:

Get your MA. The boost in salary is worth it (assuming Minn/SD schools follow something similar to the salary scheme in place out here).

At any decent district or independent school, having your MA or even your PhD will not make you less likely to be hired. It will make you more likely to be hired. If for some reason (geography, perhaps) you are applying to a school that intentionally hires less-qualified teachers, just don't tell them you have your PhD.

There are many, many places to publish serious history that do not require you to have an advanced degree.

 

[Queen_Dopplepopolis]

Get your MA. The boost in salary is worth it (assuming Minn/SD schools follow something similar to the salary scheme in place out here).

Would you suggest a MA in Education or an MA in history/my field of study?

 

[Maerdwyn]

I would suggest the MA in history, although as mentioned before, in public schools, a masters is a masters is a masters, and a masters of education is much easier to earn. If, however, you enjoy doing research in your field, and want the flexibility to possibly do something outside the public school system (do a PhD in history, teach a community college course or two in the evenings, or go to a prestigious private school, etc.) the degree in a discipline will be more valuable to you.

You also may want to consider that a large number of people who go into teaching intending for it to be their career still get out of teaching public school a fter the first three years or so. Not saying it to discourage you, at all, just mentioning it as another factor you might want to take into account for your decision.

 

[Ycore Rixle]

Maerdwyn's advice is good. A master's is a master's is a master's, as far as salary goes. And a teaching master's is easier to get than just about any other master's. So, I would probably go with the teaching master's. If history academia is anything like physics academia, a master's is not a "halfway" step to a PhD, it's far, far closer to a bachelor's than a doctorate. So not too much incentive to stretch for it. Again, just my opinion.