We don’t get anywhere telling Governor Dennis Daugaard and the Republican Legislature that we need to pay English teachers and music teachers more, because who needs liberal arts, anyway?
So what if we tell them that agriculture, at least a couple vertebrae in South Dakota’s economic backbone, is also hamstrung by low teacher pay?
It’s often high school agriculture teachers who lead their students to a career in the ag industry, but there’s one particular position within the industry that’s short staffed – the ag teachers themselves.
…Many are lured into the ag industry by better pay. With the diverse background that ag education gives them – knowledge about everything from agronomy to livestock handling – they make valuable employees for major companies such as Cargill and Monsanto [Janelle Atyeo, “Agriculture Teachers in High Demand in S.D.,” Tri-State Neighbor, 2015.10.20].
Veteran McCook Central ag teacher and National Association of Agriculture Educators president-elect Terry Rieckman says policy churn adds to the stress that makes ag education grads choose more lucrative employment:
Terry Rieckman knows it can be a stressful job. He has taught ag at McCook Central High School in Salem for 32 years.
It seems like every three or four years, the nation’s education system gets an overhaul and teachers have to teach to an entirely new set of standards and follow new guidelines, he said.
…Nine of Rieckman’s former students went on to major in ag education. One of them is teaching. Others chose careers in the ag industry where pay is higher [Atyeo, 2015.10.20].
One out of nine? I don’t think we can blame Rieckman’s teaching; that’s the market saying we aren’t paying ag teachers enough.
Blue Ribbon K-12 panel meets next week Thursday. Will they get the message and propose the real solution to South Dakota’s teacher shortage, increased state funding for a regionally competitive salary?
South Dakota: adopt my cannabis template.
While what I see here on the ground in the agriculture industry is purely anecdotal evidence there is a definite shortage of workers for jobs like agronomist, and feed specialist. It’s no wonder ag teachers are being raided by the local co-ops.
adelstein’s blog looks at ag undervalue and greed undercutting techer pay, i suppose
Leslie, I don’t fully understand Stan’s problem. Producing ag land should not be taxed like a rural or urban property. Now some of the large factory farms, yeah, those are more “factory” than “farms,” and should be taxed at a higher rate. Maybe they are, I don’t know. But, really, why not have a tax on income to increase teacher salaries and lower the property tax for homeowners.
Adelstein owns lots of residential and commercial rental property. Thus, he wants taxes on such property reduced to a minimum. He naturally opposes any sort of income tax so he consistently touts an increase to the sales tax. Self-serving, self-interest, self-aggrandizing.
Adelstein’s post on the undervaluation of ag land may deserve a blog post of its own. I’m at least intrigued by the numbers: 17.3 million acres of leased ag land worth $36.8 billion? He’s identified quite a revenue source there. If we stuck with property tax adjustments for our new revenue, would charging more on leased land address some of the family/corporate distinction that Donald mentions? Who is more likely to farm rented land, individuals or factory farms? Would it be at all useful/economically fair to have an owner-farmed classification and a lessee-farmed classification for ag land?
Or, as Donald says, would we tap wealth more effectively and fairly by dropping property tax and adopting an income tax?
Either way, I’m intrigued that a discussion of the lack of ag teachers could bring us to a question of a possible lack in full evaluation and taxation of farm land. Whether you’re farming or philosophizing, if you want teachers, you’re going to have to pay for them.