[ChotooMotoo]

Originally Posted by afrakabob

i'm really interested in elementary education in the inner city (inner city boston, specifically).

i'm an idealist, so i don't know if this would necessarily be a good idea, practically speaking. i feel very strongly about the need for better teachers in the inner city, and that is my first priority. but speaking in terms of practicality, i wonder if teaching at under-performing schools at the beginning of my career might be less than impressive on a resume. and especially since i'd only start out with a little experience behind me, it could burn me out really fast.

does anyone have any insight about whether it would be a better idea to start working in tougher areas of the city (because then i'll have seen the worst case scenarios while i'm still young and full of energy) and then maybe move on to higher-performing schools in more privileged areas later in life when i have a family to support and need to worry more about money?

or might it be a better idea to get some experience in higher-performing schools first, and then apply what i've learned to maintain high expectations? i'm afraid that with this option, i'd just melt in with the status quo and never leave.

jazaks

I don't know if it's good or bad. My Aunt taught English for a few years at the probably the poorest H.S. in Washington state. She found it very fulfilling. You have opportunities with poor students that you don't have with rich kids. She found that the kids there were much more respectful towards her than the kids at the richer school she teaches at now. I don't think it's hurt her career any.