It would seem obvious that the adage, “Whatever you do, do it well,” is applicable for everything in life. After all, the better you do something, the more you and everyone else benefits. This, however, may no longer be true for the pursuit of education. Today a higher degree carries with it the consequences of lower job opportunity.

As a student of NIU pursuing a career in teaching, I thought I was immune to this phenomenon. However, after phoning one of the few teachers from my high school with whom I still converse, he confirmed this situation was true.

“The way the system works is on a scale of across and down,” he said.

This means a teacher is ranked across by degree and then down by how much that degree will cost a school district. In essence, the higher the degree, the more a school district pays anyone it hires.

The other factor to consider in this situation is that every school district has different hiring capabilities. When it comes to public education, a district is funded by the state and federal government, but mostly by tax money generated from local communities. Illinois ranks at the bottom of federal funding for education, according to the State Board of Education’s Web site. Schools are more affected by the economies of the towns around them and, to be blunt, poor communities cannot afford to hire teachers who cost more money. As a result, higher education can suffer in communities that need it the most.

It is arguably a common belief that the most qualified applicant be hired, leaving office politics aside. I would also argue that a teacher with a higher degree would not necessarily be better at teaching, but at least more informed on the subject matter they want to teach.

When I spoke with Judy Cox-Henderson, a liberal arts and sciences coordinator, on the subject, she said she usually advises students to get their master’s degree after they start teaching. Even when it comes to teaching, a job is just a means of getting by. It has become a means to make money and ensure survival, but cost should not be the deciding factor when it comes to hiring, especially in the educational field.

I applaud the idea of paying teachers more money after they obtain a higher degree, but limiting a teacher’s chance of being hired because of increased education seems backwards.

Consider this: We live in a country where the value of education is always a societal concern. A few years ago the Bush administration put through the No Child Left Behind Act and Gov. Blagojevich has been emphasizing the importance of education even at the pre-school level.

However, despite the good intentions of our leaders, students now accrue massive debt. According to the Illinois State Board of Education’s Web site, the graduation rate is only 87.4 percent, and standardized testing shows that just two years ago the average ACT score in Illinois was 20.3 out of 36. How can we be so concerned with the value of education and yet overlook the quality of our teachers? Is it a viable solution to now restrict quality for expense? The answer is obvious. Quality will result in quality. If we want a higher standard for education, then we must ensure a higher quality of teacher in the classroom.