However, the respect for teachers seems to have dropped dramatically in recent years. Nowhere is this more symptomatic than in the union battle in Wisconsin, where teachers are being portrayed as leeches sucking away at government funds. This change is replicated elsewhere: Teachers in France are also coming under increased pressure because they are perceived as a conservative movement, holding up the “necessary” reforms to destroy public services. However, no one would argue that we need to cut down on policemen, firemen or soldiers. Teachers on the other hand, have become a much more popular and vulnerable target.

It’s hard to say why that is. There is a lot of anger at what is perceived as a privileged condition: lots of holidays and good hours that allow teachers time with their families. However, although teachers’ wages are respectable (around the median income per capita), they are hardly comparable to those in the private sector. And wages don’t account for the fact that you have to explain Faulkner and geometry to 13-year-olds, which to my mind is something similar to digging a well with your fingernails: rewarding perhaps, but long, painful and frustrating.

I think the real reason for all this anger against teachers comes from a change in the nature of relationships between teachers and students. The reform movement of the 1960s sought to break all relations of authority between teachers and students, and it largely succeeded. Teachers had to change from being powerful rulers to simple channels through which students were meant to express themselves.

Yet, this important change was not accompanied by one which brought greater responsibility for parents or for children themselves. The problem is that not only has authority been dissolved, but respect has been as well. How often do you hear parents blame everything but their children for their bad grades? It’s obviously all down to the teacher if Johnny gets Ds, because you know, making him do his homework is the teacher’s responsibility. After all, learning your times tables is F-U-N! Teachers must magically ensure that pupils want to go through the painful process of learning.

Then there are the parents who believe that “studying” is overrated. You know, you can learn so much more from watching “Jersey Shore” than by studying your times tables. And look at that nice Tila Tequila girl, she got pretty far without any help from teachers. Who are these teachers who insist that my child hands in his homework on time and stops burning school property?

All this has brought resentment from parents (and thus taxpayers) against the teachers who they hold responsible for their child’s underperformance. Hence Wisconsin Governor Walker’s attempt to wrestle away their union bargaining rights. However, instead of trying to reduce the status of teachers even more, state governors should make a committed stand to restoring pride and respect, as much from students as from their parents.

(Brittany Meyer | Student Life)

The median compensation of private university presidents increased 5.5 percent in the 2007-2008 fiscal year, up to $627,750, according to The Chronicle of Higher Education’s annual executive compensation survey. The survey’s data came from federal tax documents released before the economic downturn. In light of the economy, many private university presidents have frozen their salaries or, in the case of Washington University Chancellor Mark Wrighton, taken voluntary pay cuts.

The CHE survey, which included the presidents of 419 colleges and universities, found that the median pay of private university presidents in 2007-2008 was $358,746, a 6.5 percent increase from the previous year. Pay is defined as salaries, fees, bonuses, severance payments and deferred compensation. Compensation is defined as pay plus benefits, which include health and pension plans.

Over the previous five years, the median presidential pay, adjusted for inflation, grew by 14 percent.

To explain the nationwide increase in college presidents’ pay and compensation, Wrighton said that presidents’ salaries reflect the increasingly demanding and complex nature of their jobs. Wrighton said high salaries are necessary to attract talented leaders qualified for the position.

Wrighton predicted that the trend of increasing presidential salary will continue after the economy recovers.

Wrighton’s total pay was $539,250 in 2007-2008, according to the survey. His total compensation in 2007-2008, including benefits, was $769,027. The chancellor’s total compensation more than doubled between 1997-1998 and 2007-2008.

Last November, Wrighton announced he would voluntarily take two 5-percent pay cuts from his base salary to compensate for the University’s shrunken endowment. The first pay reduction went into effect on Jan. 1 and the second on July 1.

Amid the economic hardship, Wrighton said he considers his pay cut an “important symbol” of sacrifice.

“By indicating that I would be taking a pay reduction, this helps people understand the seriousness of the circumstance that we were facing,” Wrighton said.

Chancellor Wrighton is not alone in his symbolic gestures. Other top University officials, including school deans and vice chancellors, volunteered to have no increase in their compensation in 2009. High-ranking officials at other institutes of higher education have also taken pay cuts.

For example, John Hennessey, president of Stanford University, announced last December that he would take a 10 percent pay reduction from his base salary of $700,000.

With the recent signs of economic recovery, however, Wrighton said he looks forward to unfreezing the increases in compensation for administrators, faculty and staff as a means of rewarding their dedication to the University.

“I’m hoping that we’ll be able to move on to a situation where we see strong enough an economy where we can increase compensation,” Wrighton said. “We’ll be monitoring the economic situation very carefully and try to determine how best to reward the outstanding faculty and staff that we have at the University.”

Although many students were surprised by the magnitude of Wrighton’s salary, many believe it to be a legitimate compensation for his contributions to the University.

“I had no idea how much the chancellor made, but I’m sure that he deserves his salary,” freshman Elizabeth Fang said.

Others responded with more reservations.

“I have no idea what Chancellor Wrighton does on a daily basis,” freshman Allison Brenner said. “He only deserves such a high salary if his responsibilities merit it.”