Teaching=STRESS! Whether it's worth it or not is up to you.
(sigh) This is a topic that I have really strong views about and I am about to write a book here. If it bores anyone, just skip it.
So, if I knew then what I know now, would I do it again? N-O, No. I'd choose another field, perhaps law. Don't misunderstand, I love actual teaching, being with children, opening their eyes to the world through print and helping them acquire skills necessary to a satisfying life. Read on and I'll explain.
First, I like what the other responders said to you about Montessori middle and high school. They are almost non-existent. Parents who sent their children to Montessori preschool, primary, elementary and love it, and wish they could continue to high school. If you love to teach, thinking about this kind of venue or starting a preschool are viable opportunities. There are few openings in quality preschools.
The difference between private and public school is, if the parent pays to have their child in school, they expect their child to be successful, make good grades and be prepared. They support the teacher's efforts. In public schools...well let's face it, it is all about teaching to standardized test scores. There is nothing more. I was told this past week by a county school district official, children should be learning from bell-to-bell how to read, write and compute (math) to make test scores in the school's API/APY range. We shouldn't be teaching science, social sciences, or any other subject, just math, writing, and reading. And that's it.
All that day it was a total moment of epiphany for me. I wondered what I was doing working 50-60 hour weeks for a system that I find hard to believe in? Homeschooling always seemed like either a joke or place for eccentrics to me, until lately. I've changed my mind and see it in a much better light. I question a public system that doesn't totally prepare a child for life in the 2000's. Children need science, technology, social studies, music, art, as well as how to read, write and do math. They need to be taught how to be critical thinkers and problem solvers. They need to learn how to use technological tools and to use them to find answers & for acquiring knowledge. What is public school giving? Learn to answer a set of test questions because some legislators said that every child had to be proficient by a certain time. So...? What about students with slow learning curves? What about students with learning difficulties or disabilities, students of lower intelligence, students with medical/mental health problems, students of low economic opportunity or family issues, students just learning English (perhaps whose parents don't speak English either), students with no academic aptitude who are great at art, music, mechanics, or sports, etc? What happens when any of these students aren't able to demonstrate mastery of the tests? The teacher, school, and district is blamed.
California was proud to set their standards and bar very high when standardized testing was established. Admirable, but our proficiency level is lots higher than many other state's levels. It means that our students must be a lot more proficient and knowledgeable than children from other states. It's hard to deliver that while acknowledging that every child is different, with different talents and needs. Do we really believe that every child in California is brighter and able to do more than children in other states? How do we justify that, on what scientific basis was that established? Why doesn't the United States give every child the exact same test at the exact same age/grade level if they expect to censure states for not bringing their students to proficiency on the same date? Now they want to evaluate teachers and deliver pay by children's test scores. Let's be real- what does that have to do with anything that is actually important? Test scores that indicate that a child has acquired more knowledge individually and is moving along are valuable, but in comparison to a group; are humans a herd of cattle to be delivered to a certain point all at the same time? I'll leave that for you to ponder, because this is the system that you are contemplating joining.
As for your decision, the previous responders have said it all in detail. Teachers are being laid off, there will be another round in California this spring. Further, new teachers have little hope of getting tenure because of two things. First the lay-offs and second, a lot of districts treat new teachers as an expendable commodity. They fill a temporary need, non-reelect them just before tenure, get someone else when they need again. That keeps their budgets required for salary low. If you get non-reelected before tenure you have to list that on any application, which will get you passed over in any application process. Some districts allow people to resign when they are going to be non-reelected and they can try again elsewhere with a good excuse for having left their previous employment. Special Education is not a safe harbor either. You must have twice the college of education units, twice the requirements to get the credential (because you will need both a Multi subject Clear and an Education Specialist Level II for a job in CA today), for twice the work and the same pay. Many districts are using a mantra of "inclusion" to dismantle special education programs and push students with disabilities in regular classrooms, subjecting them to extraordinary stresses as they try to master standardized content with their grade-level peers. Lastly, you have absolutely no choice in what grade you teach. The administration places teachers where they want you.
I apologize for getting on my soap box. Still if you are considering being a teacher in California, someone has to change the color of your glasses from rose to clear, so that you can decide if this is what you really want. (hugs) to you, I am somewhat jealous that you are at home with your precious little ones and not under the API/APY hammer each day. Hope all of us have given you some food for thought.