No, All Teachers Don't Deserve a Raise

[Fiddytree]

As an individual who left teaching to go into business for a better income I can tell you this. There are some excellent teachers who do what they do for the love of it. But they are in a minority. The majority of teachers are people who don't have the motivation or belly fire to do something that earns more money. I believe that teachers are underpaid and I believe that better incomes for teachers coupled with real accountability would improve education in the U.S. But government management and the teachers unions aren't headed in that direction. The problems with education in America can be traced directly to those who run it. It is curious, isn't it, that we as a society value the work of professional athletes and movie actors above the work of those who educate our children.

I am someone who thought (and still thinks) that the Common Core was mostly an irrelevant reform effort that would produce little by way of results.

Government enthusiasm for thoughtful and energetic reform is quite varied and varied in results at all levels, but I must say, after a great deal of historical study and observation, I have come away with a great deal more respect for the federal government's role than I have with state or local government. With the education field as a whole, I have had a mixed appraisal for self-initiative, as sometimes it moves forward, but often on superficial issues. Other times state and local education actors puff up that they are engaging in self-reform, but you end up finding out it was as a result of federal grant dollars or an esoteric federal administrative mandate *to do the reform.* Even further, you end up finding out your state neglected to move forward on more ambitious and worthwhile projects, despite it being a stated option in the grant or that a number (sometimes low) states have moved forward on them.

Overall, outside a few dedicated and challenging figures, I would say that lethargy often rules the day. In some respects that can be quite fine, as often there is wisdom in not fixing what isn't broke. But often when reform is desperately needed, even with a multi-agency crisis brewing (that is acknowledged at most levels of government at the local, state, and federal levels and in the general public), many sections of our educational field are more apt to resist than collaborate or institute internal improvements.
Sometimes the internal improvements can be so otherwise uncontroversial that nearly all states across the country have instituted a given reform to the great benefit or safety of the students, and still they fight, with the same bodies that fought the reform in all the other states many years earlier.

The opposition will depend on a given topic. With systemic reforms, Sometimes it is the teacher unions, other times it is educational leaders, other times still it may be our likely inexperienced school boards. Yet, for individual transactions between student & family and instructor and administrator, you can often find the resistance in the hands of individual teachers themselves. These may be instituted best practices, established for decades, it won't matter. They could be state or federal mandates, often then they do care, sometimes because their superiors will force them to comply with the law, rather than out of some idealistic notion.

Outside some notable exceptions, I found myself subscribing to Chester Finn's observations regarding the difficulty accountability faces. Politically he said that liberals love federal financial endorsements, but hate accountability while conservatives love accountability but loathe federal involvement. Unfortunately, despite some wisdom in the belief that the federal government isn't competent enough to manage local affairs, often much of the progress that has been made is as a result of the federal government poking and prodding a complacent local and state education system. The local and state education system, though largely protected by an active and energized ground-level teaching and administrative base, are also hampered by it. Sloth-like attitudes permeate readily at the state and local level where teacher unions and administrative groups exercise greater strength than at any other level of government. Thus it is to their advantage to seek the liberal's traditional approach to encourage federal increased federal moneys without allowing the federal government from attaching nearly as many strings as it could, and arguably, ought to demand in return.

 

[Fiddytree]

2 things:

1) For many teachers, and I'm sure you know this, it's not that we feel underpaid as much as we feel underappreciated. I just watched Alex Rodriguez go to bat 4 times and was only successful once. For that effort, he was paid $345,679. We can get into all the reasons why, but all the reasons essentially come down to the idea society values sports entertainment more than education. It's not so much that we're underpaid, it's that we're not paid nearly as much as we're worth.

Though, one could easily argue that aside from the individual's talent, very very few athletes make it to the professional rank. Further, the average salary for the professional is not nearly as high as top-rank talent. Further still, most players have Rey short stays in professional sports, with only the cream of the crop of the cream of the crop having lengthy stays. Then, perhaps to suit your point, these same individuals are often given poor educations to sustain themselves upon their exit.

Not too long ago, I was personally aware of a former national professional athlete who wanted to take a position in an incredibly under-funded field (far worse than that of the comparatively bourgeois lifestyle of the ground-level teacher). Needless to say, they did not get the position, but it was another reminder of how televised guts and glory kind of misses the point about these athlete's lives. The individual was otherwise an outstanding person who relished helping people, but didn't have the necessary background to sustain the position. So they weren't like our now-infamous former Cleveland Browns quarterback in lacking ambition or haven't yet entered the road to recovery.

 

[Fiddytree]

2 things:

2) If not all teachers deserve a raise, how do you determine which ones do, especially given the fact education is dependent on many variables, including major variables outside the control of the teacher?

Though I often find that the variables outside the control of the teacher to have mixed truths in it (often many of those same complaints can instead be found directly within the given teacher's methods or their response to outside forces), I am much more sympathetic toward your broader point here.

There is less that we know about measuring a teacher's role than we know about what the student brings in with him. Despite it being a very old role, and despite it being a fairly old bureaucratic system, we seem to know less about the ground level interactions of the teacher than we do about a given child's interactions with various stimuluses and their interactions with given social institutions. We can produce studies galore about how an obscure administrative rule in various state agencies statistically increases their success or tragic failure in life, but we don't have the same sort of publications (or perhaps yet, haven't been able to figure them out) for teachers. It's fascinating, but nevertheless, the most vexing of problems. Perhaps some of that is a reflection of the educational field being unwilling to subject itself to intense critique, but perhaps not. I have seen evidence of both in the field's archives at state and federal levels.

I like the concept of merit pay, and would enjoy seeing it experimented with further. At the end of the day, however, it may have to continue relying on less satisfactory impulses: by degree, by specialization, and by length of contract experience.

 

[Fiddytree]

In almost no cases are schools allowed to take money from grants or the state and just give it to teachers to spend on what they actually need.

Often for very good reason, actually. In other state agencies, it is also not unheard of for them to sometimes shift the funds in undesirable locations anyway. If a grant were to, for instance, appropriate funds toward administering a specific program under the auspices of a given state or local agency, the legislators or grant providers, had very specific intent about the need for X program. Without the additional accountability measures involved, there's nothing to prevent said state or local agency actor to simultaneously lobby the state or grant provider for dollars while spending it in ways c largely (or even completely) against the intent of said funder.

We're going through one of those restitutions right now, actually. The state agency fudged its obligations, sending scores of money's into the pockets of administrators and base staff salaries while providing little to no services said funds were to go for. Said funder found out about it, and now they are in negotiation.

Nevertheless, grant requirements, accountability, and short-sightedness of grants apply. Considering that sometimes state or federal law requires interagency cooperation, but the grant sources from the same agencies likewise directly prevent or make it difficult to do said cooperation, this presents a systemic problem. Furthermore, given that grant dollars go to needed places doesn't mean that there isn't a lack of grant dollars allocated to other base needs. As in your case, a state funder can certainly fund dollars for administering any given aspect of education, but doesn't have a separate funding source for basic supplies or supplies to which administer said program or programs.

 

[jet57]

I know what you're thinking --- isn't she a teacher?? Yes, I am. I have my Bachelors in Early Childhood Education, a Masters in K-12 Reading Education and a Reading Specialist endorsement. This coming year will be year #12 for me.

I have heard throughout my life that teachers make next-to-nothing and deserve a raise. This is usually a blanket statement whereas it's implied that all teachers make less than they should and all deserve a raise. I'm here to tell you --- they don't all make less than they should and they don't all deserve a raise.

Here me out.

The Opinion -- Teachers make less than they should and they deserve a raise.

The most glaring part of this opinion is that it lumps all teachers together. Not all teachers are Mrs. Frizzle (10 points if you get that reference). In my experience, MOST teachers aren't Mrs. Frizzle. Just like in any career, there are people who are super awesome at their job, pretty good, just okay and awful. Just because their job is "teacher" doesn't mean they are good at it. Why should a Mrs. Frizzle be put in the same category as a Mrs. Gorf (10 more points...)? Doesn't Mrs. Frizzle deserve a higher paycheck than Mrs. Gorf? Why should they be considered "equals" simply because they have both been teaching 20 years?

No, not all teachers work their asses off during the summer to get ready for the new year. No, not all teachers spend countless extra hours at school without getting paid. No, not all teachers spend their own money on things for their classroom. Those are the Mrs. Frizzles of the education world --- and it's not the norm. I can't tell you how many teachers I know who refuse to come in to school unless they're paid for it. I can't tell you how many teachers I know who do absolutely nothing during the summer pertaining to their students or education. I can't tell you how many teachers I know who slide in the door at the exact time they're supposed to be there and are out the door the second we're allowed to leave. Why should a raise be given to teachers who do the bare minimum? How can you even compare the bare minimum teacher with the one who goes above and beyond?

Now, salaries...I can only speak for my district, but I know of teachers in other districts that have similar stories.

I work in a low-income district. Most families make somewhere in the $20K to $30K range. The average salary in my district is $45,000. We have almost-retired teachers making $70K and up. Now, I don't know about other districts, but that's pretty darn good for that area.

My brother (who makes about $30K) was bragging the other day that he probably makes more money than I do. I looked at him like he was nuts. He has absolutely no clue that I make almost twice what he makes. It's just been ingrained in his head that teachers are poor.

So, no. Not all teachers make less than they should. Most teachers aren't poor. And not all teachers deserve a raise.

So, are you saying that you're Mrs. Frizzle? Your avatar does show a cartoon...

Teachers that live is high cost of living areas need more to make a living and to be able to live the districts, or even counties where they work. In poor areas where you teach, having salary that's 15 large over the average is fine for a salary, because the average certainly doesn't represent nurses or cops or firemen. And after someone has spent about ten years improving themselves with education, don't they deserve the benefits of their hard work? Shouldn't they be appreciated for educating the next generation?

Teachers need to be making a salary that is commensurate with their their cost of living, and they should be able to participate in the economy.

 

[ttwtt78640]

So, are you saying that you're Mrs. Frizzle? Your avatar does show a cartoon...

Teachers that live is high cost of living areas need more to make a living and to be able to live the districts, or even counties where they work. In poor areas where you teach, having salary that's 15 large over the average is fine for a salary, because the average certainly doesn't represent nurses or cops or firemen. And after someone has spent about ten years improving themselves with education, don't they deserve the benefits of their hard work? Shouldn't they be appreciated for educating the next generation?

Teachers need to be making a salary that is commensurate with their their cost of living, and they should be able to participate in the economy.

Where you live or how many dependents you have does not change your skill level. If a worker lives in a high price home or has (too?) many dependents then they deserve no more pay than one of equal skill that lives more modestly or has fewer dependents. That is the fallacy of the living wage concept.

 

[Phys251]

I'm advocating for good teachers and our children getting a good education.

Then let's start supporting them again and let's stop throwing them under the bus. We have that happen enough already from politicians and the media. We do not need it from fellow teachers.

 

[jet57]

Where you live or how many dependents you have does not change your skill level. If a worker lives in a high price home or has (too?) many dependents then they deserve no more pay than one of equal skill that lives more modestly or has fewer dependents. That is the fallacy of the living wage concept.

I never said that teachers deserved more for the size of families etc. I said that they deserves a salary that will afford them a living in their market. Everybody has differing expenses, but in Palo Alto for instance a city planning commissioner quit her job because of the cost of living.

So, teachers should - do what? video conference their classes from North Dakota, so that they can rent or by in that market?

Let's let the Josie move to New York and try and rent or buy based on she's satisfied with now.

 

[Fiddytree]

Then let's start supporting them again and let's stop throwing them under the bus. We have that happen enough already from politicians and the media. We do not need it from fellow teachers.

Other than lacking financial resources, the teacher-hate meme is greatly exaggerated. The field could use a lot more critique and self-examination, without the already wanton amounts of self-glorification. The only reasons why it hasn't happened yet are:

1) Public employees as a whole need a sense of mission to make up for their relatively modest means. This means government employees tend to seek a mythos that more than suggests civic-mindedness.

2) Teachers, nearly above most other human service public employees, seem to gravitate toward self-aggrandizement and react with even greater defense than other public employees, when evaluated in any way similar to other public agencies (that is not to include how regularly the field and its entry-level practitioners denigrates the general public, parents, and students). The only competition the teacher seems to have in that department is the social worker.

I have met a few educators and administrators who point out the lackluster movement from fellow education professionals, but not nearly as many as the social workers. Of course, the social worker tends to hide their complaints because of their bosses, but I have seen it more readily from them than the educators, unfortunately.

 

[Phys251]

Other than lacking financial resources, the teacher-hate meme is greatly exaggerated. The field could use a lot more critique and self-examination, without the already wanton amounts of self-glorification. The only reasons why it hasn't happened yet are:

Really? Really? Is that a fact? And you know this how? Because you've been a K-12 teacher and you know just how high morale is among teachers? Just in case you didn't see it, that was blatant sarcasm. The tone-deafness in the quoted text is not welcome.

1) Public employees as a whole need a sense of mission to make up for their relatively modest means. This means government employees tend to seek a mythos that more than suggests civic-mindedness.

Teachers go into teaching for more than money? No ****, Sherlock! Some of them could increase their salary by thousands, perhaps tens of thousands, within weeks of leaving the field and entering corporate America. This is particularly true for math and science teachers, which is part of why teacher shortages tend to hit those fields first. Do you know that in some districts, they are literally importing high school math and science teachers from abroad just to have a warm body in the room?

2) Teachers, nearly above most other human service public employees, seem to gravitate toward self-aggrandizement and react with even greater defense than other public employees, when evaluated in any way similar to other public agencies (that is not to include how regularly the field and its entry-level practitioners denigrates the general public, parents, and students). The only competition the teacher seems to have in that department is the social worker.

This is one of the most tone-deaf comments I have ever read at DP. Your views are out-of-touch with reality. Get to know some people who actually teach, and listen to their struggles, and maybe, just maybe, you will begin to learn just how off-base you are.

 

[ttwtt78640]

I never said that teachers deserved more for the size of families etc. I said that they deserves a salary that will afford them a living in their market. Everybody has differing expenses, but in Palo Alto for instance a city planning commissioner quit her job because of the cost of living.

So, teachers should - do what? video conference their classes from North Dakota, so that they can rent or by in that market?

Let's let the Josie move to New York and try and rent or buy based on she's satisfied with now.

You are mixing things up a bit here. A commute from San Jose, CA to Palo Alto, CA does what based on your (zip code?) idea? Would you seriously pay over 100% more for a math teacher that lived in Palo Alto, CA than a math teacher that lived in San Jose, CA?

Cost of Living Comparison: compare San Jose, California to Palo Alto, California

 

[Fiddytree]

Jet, this is perhaps more than you deserve on my background.

I went into the field after being a student in a contentious field of education, with a sibling likewise in the same contentious field of education. I grew up with my schools and districts regularly breaking federal law and our families needing to go to the court system to have it remedied. After my brief stint, I became disillusioned at the field for its proclaimed virtues that I saw were not being followed. So I decided to instead study its history and then begin to try to reform it from other avenues. It's a long, hard fight, but some small victories are being had in my state, in very small part, because of my efforts. My own specific education reform remains most elusive, but I'm in the process of trying to secure small, but much needed reforms that have been promised for over a quarter of a century. We're working with teachers to promote really basic changes that they've previously been hesitant to or perhaps had been kept out of the loop by school administrators. I'm also fighting to increase transparency and the usefulness of data collection from schools.

 

[jet57]

You are mixing things up a bit here. A commute from San Jose, CA to Palo Alto, CA does what bsssd on your idea? Would you seriously pay over 100% more for a math teacher that lived in Palo Alto, CA than a math teacher that lived in San Jose, CA?

Cost of Living Comparison: compare San Jose, California to Palo Alto, California

San Jose? Here; look at rents there too: https://www.rentjungle.com/average-rent-in-san-jose-rent-trends/

I'm not mixing anything up. If you live in Ellsworth Kansas where median rent is $500 a month, THEN Josie's salary works just fine as I said.

So, there's no mix up, just the real world we live in.

 

[jet57]

Jet, this is perhaps more than you deserve on my background.

I went into the field after being a student in a contentious field of education, with a sibling likewise in the same contentious field of education. I grew up with my schools and districts regularly breaking federal law and our families needing to go to the court system to have it remedied. After my brief stint, I became disillusioned at the field for its proclaimed virtues that I saw were not being followed. So I decided to instead study its history and then begin to try to reform it from other avenues. It's a long, hard fight, but some small victories are being had in my state, in very small part, because of my efforts. My own specific education reform remains most elusive, but I'm in the process of trying to secure small, but much needed reforms that have been promised for over a quarter of a century. We're working with teachers to promote really basic changes that they've previously been hesitant to or perhaps had been kept out of the loop by school administrators. I'm also fighting to increase transparency and the usefulness of data collection from schools.

Jet, this is perhaps more than you deserve on my background.

That's interesting, why would you say that?

So, what I've learned from your post - is that - you went to a school that allegedly broke laws: private? Public? Your career path led you to go into a "contentious field" of education; whatever that is, but you didn't stay in it. Now, you are trying to make local reforms...

I'm not seeing how that relates to my points on teacher salaries; what am I missing there?

 

[Fiddytree]

Public schools breaking federal (and state) laws. I was a student of special education, which is the most litigated subsection of education. Most of my education was in the general education classroom, but also receiving special education services. Same for my sibling. Nevertheless, many of us had experienced various rights violations along the way, from special education and general education staff alike. I went into secondary education, focusing on social studies (primarily history and political science).

State and local reforms, for now. I'll be making more moves later.

This relates because you claimed I hadn't a clue what I was talking about, presumably because I wasn't exposed.

 

[Slyfox696]

Though, one could easily argue that aside from the individual's talent, very very few athletes make it to the professional rank.

True, but Alex Rodriguez made more money on Friday than I've made in my entire teaching career. And he failed three times out of four.

Again, I understand the myriad of arguments which go into why A-Rod makes so much money, but it doesn't excuse the fact A-Rod only makes that much money because of the value society places on entertainment.

Though I often find that the variables outside the control of the teacher to have mixed truths in it

I've not found that in my experience. In my experience, siblings tend to succeed at roughly the same level and many times families who place little value in education have students who do not perform well.

I like the concept of merit pay, and would enjoy seeing it experimented with further. At the end of the day, however, it may have to continue relying on less satisfactory impulses: by degree, by specialization, and by length of contract experience.

The problem with merit pay is there's no baseline standard. Every child is different and every class brings unique challenges. For example, how would you determine merit pay for what I do for my school? I teach elementary computers, middle school PE, run the website and work in the tech department. Nothing I do relates to a standardized test and I literally teach every student in the 4th, 5th and 6th grades (and am the only one in those grades who teaches the subjects). How do you determine merit based pay on that?

What about the new teacher, who is always given the lower performing students when they first start? How do you judge the quality of the teacher based on his/her first couple of years with students who traditionally perform poorly, and students whom the teacher only sees for a year before sending them to the next teacher? How does that work?

Merit pay for teachers has so many problems with fairness, I just don't see it as a solution.

 

[Henrin]

Again, I understand the myriad of arguments which go into why A-Rod makes so much money, but it doesn't excuse the fact A-Rod only makes that much money because of the value society places on entertainment.

He made that kind of money because he brought in a ton of money for the sports team he played for, was a huge talent that everyone in MLB wanted, was very productive, and had a powerful union backing him.

 

[Slyfox696]

He made that kind of money because he brought in a ton of money for the sports team he played for, was a huge talent that everyone in MLB wanted, was very productive, and had a powerful union backing him.

Yes, I'm well aware of why. I've said that multiple times. In fact, I even said,"but it doesn't excuse the fact A-Rod only makes that much money because of the value society places on entertainment." which accurately describes everything you just said.

If my post comes off as confrontational, it's because I don't understand why you responded to me with something I already acknowledged. If there was some other meaning to it, I'd be happy to address your real meaning.

 

[radcen]

Since we've drifted into societal priorities...

- How many people attend school board meetings vs pro baseball games?

- How many people watch school board meeting on local access tv (when/if available) vs pro baseball games? (The ultimate lazy)

- How many people vote in elections that are school board only?

- How many people can even name their school board members vs pro baseball stars?

You say that our priorities are wrong and that we should pay teachers more and/or get better teachers? How would you answer the questions above?

(Teachers and spouses of teachers not included.)

 

[Henrin]

Yes, I'm well aware of why. I've said that multiple times. In fact, I even said,"but it doesn't excuse the fact A-Rod only makes that much money because of the value society places on entertainment." which accurately describes everything you just said.

If my post comes off as confrontational, it's because I don't understand why you responded to me with something I already acknowledged. If there was some other meaning to it, I'd be happy to address your real meaning.

How much money do teachers bring in for the state? None. Do teachers have a powerful union? Yes, yes, they do. Are teachers so valuable that people are willing to pay top dollar for them? Well, judging by their salaries, no, they're not. Are teachers very productive? Well, that would probably depend on the teacher and where they teach.

 

[Slyfox696]

How much money do teachers bring in for the state? None. Do teachers have a powerful union? Yes, yes, they do. Are teachers so valuable that people are willing to pay top dollar for them? Well, judging by their salaries, no, they're not. Are teachers very productive? Well, that would probably depend on the teacher and where they teach.

Again, I don't understand what you're trying to say. The fact of the matter is baseball players only get paid that much money because society has decided the entertainment value brought by baseball is worth that much (as I've repeatedly said). But that's exactly what I'm arguing. I'm arguing society should spend less money on entertainment, which provides very little real tangible value to society, and should devote more energy into valuing quality education (financial or simple respect for the institution).

I don't know if you're meaning to agree with me, but that's what you're doing. Teachers SHOULD be paid more, in relation to the value they bring to society. As far as "how much money do teachers bring in", the fact has been well established that those with a quality education tend to be financially better off than those without, and since government tax revenue is proportional to income earned, it can easily be argued the money brought in because of education is quite substantial.

EDIT: Also, not all teachers belong to a union. In fact, until recently, I believe teacher unionizing was forbidden in my state.

 

[Visbek]

I have heard throughout my life that teachers make next-to-nothing and deserve a raise.

The average teacher's salary is $45k. Average starting salary is $36k. EPI estimates that teachers are paid about 12% less than similarly educated professions; the OECD estimates American teachers are earning less not only than similar professions in the US, but also less than their international counterparts.

Plus, you occasionally have stunts like Gov Christie hacking away at teacher's retirement benefits. Good times, good times....

The most glaring part of this opinion is that it lumps all teachers together....

Yes, that is no different than saying "all police are good" or "all police departments have issues.

That said: It does seem like the starting and average salary is on the low side.

In my experience, MOST teachers aren't Mrs. Frizzle. Just like in any career, there are people who are super awesome at their job, pretty good, just okay and awful. Just because their job is "teacher" doesn't mean they are good at it. Why should a Mrs. Frizzle be put in the same category as a Mrs. Gorf (10 more points...)? Doesn't Mrs. Frizzle deserve a higher paycheck than Mrs. Gorf?

OK then, let's implement a bonus system.

But what will we base it on? Student performance on standardized tests? That could work, but could also incentivize cheating.

This is an easy problem to spot, but a difficult one to solve, as the substitute system could be just as off-base as the current one.

I can't tell you how many teachers I know who refuse to come in to school unless they're paid for it.

That might be a result of their feeling (or being) underpaid. Just a thought.

Now, salaries...I can only speak for my district, but I know of teachers in other districts that have similar stories.

Actually, you CAN speak for other districts, because we collect statistics on teacher pay. EPI, NEA, OECD etc., people are definitely doing some research on this question.

I work in a low-income district. Most families make somewhere in the $20K to $30K range. The average salary in my district is $45,000. We have almost-retired teachers making $70K and up. Now, I don't know about other districts, but that's pretty darn good for that area.

I'm sure it is. But it doesn't make any sense whatsoever to look at one single district and, on that basis, make claims about an entire nation.

Anecdotes are suitable as examples; they do not constitute proof.

 

[jet57]

Public schools breaking federal (and state) laws. I was a student of special education, which is the most litigated subsection of education. Most of my education was in the general education classroom, but also receiving special education services. Same for my sibling. Nevertheless, many of us had experienced various rights violations along the way, from special education and general education staff alike. I went into secondary education, focusing on social studies (primarily history and political science).

State and local reforms, for now. I'll be making more moves later.

This relates because you claimed I hadn't a clue what I was talking about, presumably because I wasn't exposed.

I never said anything about you. I've been posting to Josie and ttwtt78640.

You made a random post with my name on it, so I replied.

Now, you've made another random post... I still don't see how any of what you're saying has anything to do with anything I've said previously to anybody.

 

[Fiddytree]

I never said anything about you. I've been posting to Josie and ttwtt78640.

You made a random post with my name on it, so I replied.

Now, you've made another random post... I still don't see how any of what you're saying has anything to do with anything I've said previously to anybody.

You are right. My apologies. On my small display the avatars became deceptive to my eyes and I mistook one for the other.

 

[jet57]

You are right. My apologies. On my small display the avatars became deceptive to my eyes and I mistook one for the other.

No problem at all, nice talkin with 'ya though.

Have a good evening.