Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Performance pay for teachers.

taerictaeric Registered User, ClubPA regular
edited October 2009 in Debate and/or Discourse
So, I know it has been discussed here before, but marginal revolution links to a research into using performance pay for teachers. I count myself in the skeptic category as to whether or not performance based pay will work. However, this study does suggest otherwise.

Does this adjust anyone's thoughts here?

taeric on
«13456711

Posts

  • geckahngeckahn Registered User
    edited October 2009
    I'd really just prefer to lengthen the time needed to attain tenure and pay them better.

    What we need to do is attract good teachers to the profession, and then keep them there. Performance based incentives are hard to do right, and can lead to things like teaching the test, etc. Also, replacing the existing norms with market rules could definitely lead to a decrease in performance.

  • SageinaRageSageinaRage Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Well the usual concern is not whether to have some kind of performance pay, but how to measure it. I haven't read all 47 pages of the paper, but it sounds like they linked pay to performance on standardized tests, and the paper concludes that it worked by measuring whether or not those scores went up - which is the usual suggested method. The question then becomes whether or not actual teaching methods improved, or they simply taught to the test, which has become so prevalent in our classrooms already with NCLB. I might take a look at this paper later, but I don't have time to read all that right now.

  • MalkorMalkor Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    What do you do about kids who can't/won't learn? Or just straight up don't want to be there?

    Hell growing up I probably knew some kids that would probably purposely fail if they knew the teacher's pay depended on them. No joke.

    14271f3c-c765-4e74-92b1-49d7612675f2.jpg
  • HeartlashHeartlash Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    I'd prefer performance-based bonuses with a minimum salary assuming that an adequately complex set of perimeters for "performance" could be established.

    TiSBcast.com - Home of This is Serious Business, a weekly roundtable podcast involving media, beer, and general merriment.
  • MelksterMelkster Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    There was a Planet Money podcast on this very issue. Pay based on performance sounds great, but in the real world, it's extremely difficult to measure with any degree of accuracy.

    Gimme a minute to look up the podcast...

    here it is

    Well crap I can't find the full version online anywhere anymore.

    ::Sadface::

    Well if someone else can find it ill give you a cookie.

  • MalkorMalkor Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    I think I listened to that recently!!

    14271f3c-c765-4e74-92b1-49d7612675f2.jpg
  • KirbithKirbith Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    I am really against performance based pay.

    What about the teachers that work in poorly performing school districts.

    Hell my dad worked in an awful school district for 27 years. Now while he tried his best to teach all the kids he had, there were a LOT that just did not want to learn. And this was only in 6th or 7th grade. These are the kind of kids that will just keep failing on purpose over and over until their parents let them drop our or they are old enough to do it themselves.

    But those kids that really tried and wanted to learn really made it worth it for my dad. Despite all the asshole kids. Hell they would throw shit at his head. All the time. Just because it was that bad of a school district.

    I don't see how it would be fair to essentially punish teachers that work in poorly performing schools. That doesn't make them bad teachers.

    Just pay teachers better already. Its insane the amount of education they have to get for how awful their pay is.

    Backloggery | Steam - Kirbith | PSN - Kirbith | 3DS: 4957-2249-4817
  • MelksterMelkster Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Malkor wrote: »
    I think I listened to that recently!!

    Well I knew there was a reason I liked you so much.
    Spoiler:

  • redxredx East Bumblefuck, PARegistered User regular
    edited October 2009
    I wish our public education system rewarded teachers enough so that their would be significant competition for jobs and wages. This should lead to better more motivated teachers.
    The study wrote:
    We find no evidence of any adverse consequences as a result of the incentive programs. Incentive schools do significantly better on both mechanical components of the test (designed to reflect rote learning) and conceptual components of the test (designed to capture deeper understanding of the material),suggesting that the gains in test scores represent an actual increase in learning outcomes. Students in incentive schools do significantly better not only in math and language (for which there were incentives), but also in science and social studies (for which there were no incentives), suggesting positive spillover effects....

    Without having looked too close at the methodologies of the study, and ignoring the short timeline, this right here addresses my primary concern. Yes, you can easily motivate teachers to teach children to get higher grades on tests, but I'm always wary of how well they are teaching the children to actually use the information in their lives. Looks like the study only ran for a couple years, and I worry what will happen once teachers become more indoctrinated into a reward based system.

    I also worry about the effects on ESE students. Depending on how the system is weighted, it could discourage attention and desire to work with students on one end of the spectrum or the other. Weight for improvement, and you are better served spending time with students on the low end. Weight for high absolute scores and they get neglected in favor of the middle and honors students. A teacher has limited time in class and a limited number of classes they can teach, so those resources may end up distributed how ever they make the the most money for the least effort.

    The best-laid keikaku o' mice an' men gang aft agley
  • KhavallKhavall Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Kirbith wrote: »
    I am really against performance based pay.

    What about the teachers that work in poorly performing school districts.

    Hell my dad worked in an awful school district for 27 years. Now while he tried his best to teach all the kids he had, there were a LOT that just did not want to learn. And this was only in 6th or 7th grade. These are the kind of kids that will just keep failing on purpose over and over until their parents let them drop our or they are old enough to do it themselves.

    But those kids that really tried and wanted to learn really made it worth it for my dad. Despite all the asshole kids. Hell they would throw shit at his head. All the time. Just because it was that bad of a school district.

    I don't see how it would be fair to essentially punish teachers that work in poorly performing schools. That doesn't make them bad teachers.

    Just pay teachers better already. Its insane the amount of education they have to get for how awful their pay is.

    Obviously you would have to make a system that adjusts to location and environment. I don't think anyone is suggesting that you judge on a universal scale.

  • Xenogears of BoreXenogears of Bore Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Even bigger problem is that you'd have teachers teaching to a test even more so then you do now, because that would be how the performance would be evaluated.

    3DS CODE: 3093-7068-3576
  • taerictaeric Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited October 2009
    As I said, I'm a skeptic when it comes to performance based pay for teachers. This report just got me thinking about it again. And... I don't exactly keep notes on this, so I can not recall all of my concerns.

    Concerns of "teaching to the test" don't really bother me. Unless you can come up with a better way to measure learning, the simple fact of the matter is that our current system is broke and we need to improve it. If we can get people doing better on tests, than hopefully that means something is sticking. Then we can just work on controlling what that something is.

    I do remember having concerns of people in poorer districts. I would assume that performance will be measured relatively. And, frankly, I don't give a damned how much someone really wants to teach kids, if they can not keep more and more from purposely failing out, something needs to be done. Lowering their pay will give an incentive for them to get out, and will force more radical measures in the places that need them.

    I'll have to listen to that podcast. Thanks for the link!

  • MagicPrimeMagicPrime "We're ready to believe you..." FireSideWizardRegistered User regular
    edited October 2009
    I think one of the larger problems is the mindset that "learning" is really a thing you can measure.

    55uviDS.png
    This neo-feudalism would be more tolerable if our betters had fancy titles.
  • SaammielSaammiel Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    There is no reason that you need to use standardized test scores as your only input into a performance based system. Plenty of systems, in a variety of sectors, are able to meld quantitative and qualitative feedback into performance measures. I don't see how teaching is so unique that it stands as a contrast to most any other profession. I may not like some parts of the implementation of my performance pay system, but it is far far better than a tenure based system.

    And we don't need to create some perfect system, it just needs to be a marginal improvement over the status quo to make it worthwhile to adopt. And the status quo is absolutely stupid. Breaking the back of the teacher's union is probably the best thing that could be done to change that, but unfortunately Democrats in aggregate are beholden to their support, so it is unlikely to change under the current administration.

    Also, even if standardized test scores are a component in the pay system, you can measure on relative rather than absolute gains. It isn't as though none of this has been hashed out in other areas.

  • taerictaeric Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited October 2009
    MagicPrime wrote: »
    I think one of the larger problems is the mindset that "learning" is really a thing you can measure.

    This is a copout. Teaching already "works" by teaching to something. If a teacher has not at least devised a method by which they will measure how they are teaching, than they are wasting their time. They have ceased being teachers and become performers, that we hope will convey a message to people.

  • KanamitKanamit Registered User
    edited October 2009
    taeric wrote: »
    Concerns of "teaching to the test" don't really bother me. Unless you can come up with a better way to measure learning, the simple fact of the matter is that our current system is broke and we need to improve it. If we can get people doing better on tests, than hopefully that means something is sticking. Then we can just work on controlling what that something is.
    I don't think you realize how extreme "teaching to the test" can get. It's gotten to the point where teachers just give practice test after practice test and just give the answers to the kids. And if they don't, budget cuts. It has robbed a generation of their critical thinking skills, all so politicians can say "scores are up."
    Breaking the back of the teacher's union is probably the best thing that could be done to change that, but unfortunately Democrats in aggregate are beholden to their support, so it is unlikely to change under the current administration.
    Yes, let's go back to the days when schools literally had no chalk, that will teach those stinkin' teachers, mooching off the public dime like that.

  • HeartlashHeartlash Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Kanamit wrote: »
    Breaking the back of the teacher's union is probably the best thing that could be done to change that, but unfortunately Democrats in aggregate are beholden to their support, so it is unlikely to change under the current administration.
    Yes, let's go back to the days when schools literally had no chalk, that will teach those stinkin' teachers, mooching off the public dime like that.

    In a less extreme sense, though, the current tenure system does have a number of negative byproducts which teachers' unions are completely unwilling, even resistant to address.

    TiSBcast.com - Home of This is Serious Business, a weekly roundtable podcast involving media, beer, and general merriment.
  • Salvation122Salvation122 Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    geckahn wrote: »
    Performance based incentives are hard to do right, and can lead to things like teaching the test, etc.
    I've never understood this objection. Surely the tests are intended to represent what we believe is important for students to know? Shouldn't the objection be that the tests are shitty, not that teachers are teaching the information they're required to?

    sig.png
  • The Crowing OneThe Crowing One Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Performance Pay, and the measuring of such is absolute bullshit.

    I mean, let's look at the "performance" of a predominantly white, upper-middle class high school where I received my education. The school has almost no issue with passing statewide exam standards and the amount of money and support thrown to the school is overwhelming. These kids will always perform well, and teaching here is a damn easier job than teaching in, say...

    A struggling urban school where my partner now teaches 10th grade history. I've seen her in action, and she puts more effort and time into her work than almost any teacher I ever had at my well performing middle-class school. And yet, she receives significantly less pay per hour. Her students are often uninterested in learning, or are so wrapped up in the issues of existing within the lower classes in a dying city that they are unable to show the same sort of performance that my white, middle-class school does.

    The right idea is to provide "incentive" pay to those who make the choice to work in struggling districts and schools. It isn't a matter of "your scores were better" therefore you need more money in your pocket, but a matter of lifestyle. Teachers do not choose to teach in struggling schools because it's fun, they do so because they have a commitment to assisting those who are disadvantaged, and that
    is what needs to be recognized. A "good" teacher will almost always choose to teach in a "good" school. I know I would. And "bad" teachers have a tendency to leave struggling schools quickly, as the money just isn't worth the effort without the commitment.

    If we're going to entice better performance from struggling schools, we need to retain teachers who are "good". At the moment, most "good" teachers sit comfortably in offices where their students and ready, willing and able to excel. Getting those "good" teachers into the struggling schools is the challenge. Honestly, being a teacher is both awesome and really stressful.

    Rewarding "performance" through pay will only lead to one thing: Already well performing schools gaining an even more competitive edge in the job market over the schools that actually do require massive help and assistance.

    3rddocbottom.jpg
  • PeregrineFalconPeregrineFalcon Registered User
    edited October 2009
    Malkor wrote: »
    Hell growing up I probably knew some kids that would probably purposely fail if they knew the teacher's pay depended on them. No joke.

    Disclaimer: I'm probably biased by both of my parents being educators, so feel free to throw a "Hahaha Disregard that I Suck Cocks" at this.

    Yeah, basically this argument here. There's enough parents using the public school system as government-funded daycare right now that the delinquent demographic of any class would probably try their hardest to fail. They would either get passed by the skin of their teeth thanks to the no-fail horseshit that's going on, or they'd just get curved up arbitrarily in order to not hamstring the district/school/teacher/etc.

    Either way, we all lose.

    Looking for a DX:HR OnLive code for my kid brother.
    Can trade TF2 items or whatever else you're interested in. PM me.
  • ronyaronya Arrrrrrf. the ivory tower's basementRegistered User regular
    edited October 2009
    How about this, then: performance pay and a further bonus for teaching in schools identified as 'struggling' or having other systematic problems, reviewed every five years or so.

    Steam
    shryke wrote: »
    Talking to ronya is a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma, that has been shit out and then eaten again by a bulldog.
  • FeralFeral Who needs a medical license when you've got style? Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Saammiel wrote: »
    I don't see how teaching is so unique that it stands as a contrast to most any other profession.

    Theoretically? No, there is no difference.

    Practically? The very notion of providing teachers with the money they need to do their jobs sends lawmakers and their constituents into anaphylactic shock. We can talk about qualtitative measures of performance or sophisticated metrics of success but such things need money to implement. What would actually happen with any incentive-based system is that we'd throw a standardized test and a scantron at them and say, "Make sure your students can mark the right bubbles or else!"

    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
    the "no true scotch, man" fallacy.
  • MagicPrimeMagicPrime "We're ready to believe you..." FireSideWizardRegistered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Both of my parents are high school teachers.

    I agree that there are just some kids that can not or will not learn. Ever.

    55uviDS.png
    This neo-feudalism would be more tolerable if our betters had fancy titles.
  • narv107narv107 Registered User
    edited October 2009
    ronya wrote: »
    How about this, then: performance pay and a further bonus for teaching in schools identified as 'struggling' or having other systematic problems, reviewed every five years or so.

    How do you measure the performance of an art or music teacher?

  • an_altan_alt Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    redx wrote: »
    I wish our public education system rewarded teachers enough so that their would be significant competition for jobs and wages. This should lead to better more motivated teachers.

    In my neck of the woods, teachers get paid quite well. If one gets on the track right after high school, it's not hard to be making $60k/year by age 30. The situation does address the first of your points, in terms that there is more competition for jobs, especially in the cities. However, the motivation remains unaddressed. Once a teacher lands a permanent job, he or she is in and essentially can't be fired without molesting a student. The best and worst teachers still get paid the same and the only motivation to be a better teacher is purely personal.

    A good salary isn't a motivation when one already has it. The motivation comes from either trying not to lose it or a chance to improve it.

    Pony wrote:
    I think that the internet has been for years on the path to creating what is essentially an electronic Necronomicon: A collection of blasphemous unrealities so perverse that to even glimpse at its contents, if but for a moment, is to irrevocably forfeit a portion of your sanity.
    Xbox - PearlBlueS0ul, Steam
  • SaammielSaammiel Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Kanamit wrote: »
    Breaking the back of the teacher's union is probably the best thing that could be done to change that, but unfortunately Democrats in aggregate are beholden to their support, so it is unlikely to change under the current administration.
    Yes, let's go back to the days when schools literally had no chalk, that will teach those stinkin' teachers, mooching off the public dime like that.

    Yes, a teacher's union whose current activities revolve primarily around rent seeking is all that is standing between us and a mass of plebians.

  • PeregrineFalconPeregrineFalcon Registered User
    edited October 2009
    narv107 wrote: »
    ronya wrote: »
    How about this, then: performance pay and a further bonus for teaching in schools identified as 'struggling' or having other systematic problems, reviewed every five years or so.

    How do you measure the performance of an art or music teacher?

    Paint me twenty laps!

    Keep up, fatty!

    Looking for a DX:HR OnLive code for my kid brother.
    Can trade TF2 items or whatever else you're interested in. PM me.
  • MelksterMelkster Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    narv107 wrote: »
    ronya wrote: »
    How about this, then: performance pay and a further bonus for teaching in schools identified as 'struggling' or having other systematic problems, reviewed every five years or so.

    How do you measure the performance of an art or music teacher?

    Or hell, a liberal arts teacher? How about a history teacher?

    Regurgitating plot lines and dates =/= learning.

    Standardized tests works great for things like assessing your ability to translate written words into verbal words, mathematical ability, as well as basic understanding of basic science. But beyond that, I'm very very skeptical.

    It is very tough to judge things like critical thinking, cultural/historical/literary insight, artistic or musical ability, etc, in standardized tests.

  • HeartlashHeartlash Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    I think some element of peer review would have to be involved, but there would definitely need to be checks against favor-baiting.

    TiSBcast.com - Home of This is Serious Business, a weekly roundtable podcast involving media, beer, and general merriment.
  • FeralFeral Who needs a medical license when you've got style? Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Melkster wrote: »
    It is very tough to judge things like critical thinking, cultural/historical/literary insight, artistic or musical ability, etc, in standardized tests.

    Well then clearly we shouldn't use standardized teahhahahahahAHAHAHAHAHOHOHOOMGHAHAHAHAHAHA

    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
    the "no true scotch, man" fallacy.
  • narv107narv107 Registered User
    edited October 2009
    Saammiel wrote: »
    Kanamit wrote: »
    Breaking the back of the teacher's union is probably the best thing that could be done to change that, but unfortunately Democrats in aggregate are beholden to their support, so it is unlikely to change under the current administration.
    Yes, let's go back to the days when schools literally had no chalk, that will teach those stinkin' teachers, mooching off the public dime like that.

    Yes, a teacher's union whose current activities revolve primarily around rent seeking is all that is standing between us and a mass of plebians.

    My wife is teaches as an adjunct at a community college. In order to teach there she was forced to either pay the $150 to join the union, or pay $120 and not join the union. She also as an adjunct is not eligible for any of the protections that joining the union provides.

    Unions are a necessary protection for the populace.

  • ronyaronya Arrrrrrf. the ivory tower's basementRegistered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Melkster wrote: »
    narv107 wrote: »
    ronya wrote: »
    How about this, then: performance pay and a further bonus for teaching in schools identified as 'struggling' or having other systematic problems, reviewed every five years or so.

    How do you measure the performance of an art or music teacher?

    Or hell, a liberal arts teacher? How about a history teacher?

    Regurgitating plot lines and dates =/= learning.

    Standardized tests works great for things like assessing your ability to translate written words into verbal words, mathematical ability, as well as basic understanding of basic science. But beyond that, I'm very very skeptical.

    It is very tough to judge things like critical thinking, cultural/historical/literary insight, artistic or musical ability, etc, in standardized tests.

    That doesn't mean that all essays or paintings are alike, though. Surely some are better and some are worse. Universities get by just fine assigning scores to essays on far vaguer topics, so it can be done.

    Here's a possibility: to set down some guidelines, have curriculum development set down a rubric of desirable qualities and rough scoring. Then for standardized tests (which are, after all, standardized), have essays swapped across counties and marked twice by two other different teachers (randomly assigned). Scores are averaged. Add an appeals board to take care of outlying weird scores. The original teacher only sees the scripts after they're marked and returned.

    At least that's how it used to be done in my primary school...

    Steam
    shryke wrote: »
    Talking to ronya is a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma, that has been shit out and then eaten again by a bulldog.
  • SaammielSaammiel Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Melkster wrote: »
    Or hell, a liberal arts teacher? How about a history teacher?

    Regurgitating plot lines and dates =/= learning.

    Standardized tests works great for things like assessing your ability to translate written words into verbal words, mathematical ability, as well as basic understanding of basic science. But beyond that, I'm very very skeptical.

    It is very tough to judge things like critical thinking, cultural/historical/literary insight, artistic or musical ability, etc, in standardized tests.

    And yet, those very teachers do so constantly by assigning and grading assignments and tests. Plus you can use thigns like peer reviews, interviews with a random sampling of the students by someone familiar with the educational environment, periodic monitoring, etc. Which all would still be better than tenure based systems. It wouldn't be perfect, just marginally better.

  • narv107narv107 Registered User
    edited October 2009
    That doesn't mean that all essays or paintings are alike, though. Surely some are better and some are worse. Universities get by just fine assigning scores to essays on far vaguer topics, so it can be done.

    And what of the teacher's performance review for the year that they have mostly colorblind or tone deaf students?

    This amounts to having performance pay for clothing retailers based on how well their customers score on the red carpet.

  • SaammielSaammiel Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    narv107 wrote: »
    That doesn't mean that all essays or paintings are alike, though. Surely some are better and some are worse. Universities get by just fine assigning scores to essays on far vaguer topics, so it can be done.

    And what of the teacher's performance review for the year that they have mostly colorblind or tone deaf students?

    This amounts to having performance pay for clothing retailers based on how well their customers score on the red carpet.

    Seriously? Your argument is that classes full of color blind and/or tone deaf students are going to skew results? Even if you did nothing to address this (and you certainly could provide for mitigating factors in any feedback system), it is statistical noise. So some tiny percentage of teachers is subjected to an injustice because of that. It is still far less than the systemic problems with tenure.

  • ronyaronya Arrrrrrf. the ivory tower's basementRegistered User regular
    edited October 2009
    narv107 wrote: »
    That doesn't mean that all essays or paintings are alike, though. Surely some are better and some are worse. Universities get by just fine assigning scores to essays on far vaguer topics, so it can be done.

    And what of the teacher's performance review for the year that they have mostly colorblind or tone deaf students?

    This amounts to having performance pay for clothing retailers based on how well their customers score on the red carpet.

    If we had publicly-funded clothing retailers who would otherwise randomly assign clothing designers, then yes paying them based on how well their customers score on the red carpet is still an improvement. It wouldn't be fair to the odd brilliant designer whose customers happen to suck. But you know what? It's still better than having institutionalized rent-seeking taking control of the entire industry.

    If we choose to publicly fund education, then we needs to implement a way to incentivize better teaching. Why would you want to reward bad teachers as much as good teachers?

    Steam
    shryke wrote: »
    Talking to ronya is a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma, that has been shit out and then eaten again by a bulldog.
  • The Crowing OneThe Crowing One Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Saammiel wrote: »
    narv107 wrote: »
    That doesn't mean that all essays or paintings are alike, though. Surely some are better and some are worse. Universities get by just fine assigning scores to essays on far vaguer topics, so it can be done.

    And what of the teacher's performance review for the year that they have mostly colorblind or tone deaf students?

    This amounts to having performance pay for clothing retailers based on how well their customers score on the red carpet.

    Seriously? Your argument is that classes full of color blind and/or tone deaf students are going to skew results? Even if you did nothing to address this (and you certainly could provide for mitigating factors in any feedback system), it is statistical noise. So some tiny percentage of teachers is subjected to an injustice because of that. It is still far less than the systemic problems with tenure.

    While it may be a bad analogy, the fact remains that students in upper-income districts "perform better" than students in lower-income districts. If anything, pay should be inversely calculated based on "performance".

    It really isn't about "rewarding" teachers. If teachers needed a "reward" to do their jobs I think we'd have a lot less teachers. The real issue is that teachers should be rewarded for working in districts where they are needed more. At the moment, teachers are "rewarded" when they're working in schools that already perform well.

    3rddocbottom.jpg
  • FoF404FoF404 Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    My oldest just started K-4 in public schools. His teacher makes $71,000 with $32,000 in fringe benefits (there's a site to look up public employees). I believe the teachers here also get a minimum of 3% increase each year. Now are teachers just paid well here, or is this the norm?

    My opinion is that this seems a little high for 9 months of teaching kids their colors, shapes, and abc's....but I don't know the answer to what should be a fair amount. Teaching older kids is a totally different story obviously.

    steam_sig.png
  • The Crowing OneThe Crowing One Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    FoF404 wrote: »
    My oldest just started K-4 in public schools. His teacher makes $71,000 with $32,000 in fringe benefits (there's a site to look up public employees). I believe the teachers here also get a minimum of 3% increase each year. Now are teachers just paid well here, or is this the norm?

    Starting pay in my city (low-income, urban, poor "performance") is something around $40k with increases each year (which have mostly been placed on hold due to budget cuts and the desire not to fire people).

    What's the income like in your district?

    3rddocbottom.jpg
  • SaammielSaammiel Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    While it may be a bad analogy, the fact remains that students in upper-income districts "perform better" than students in lower-income districts. If anything, pay should be inversely calculated based on "performance".

    It really isn't about "rewarding" teachers. If teachers needed a "reward" to do their jobs I think we'd have a lot less teachers. The real issue is that teachers should be rewarded for working in districts where they are needed more. At the moment, teachers are "rewarded" when they're working in schools that already perform well.

    This has already been addressed. You can account for differences in district composition by measuring on relative performance gains instead of absolute gains, and also filtering it through the lens of the underlying socio-economic circumstances of the district, as well as things like peer review, observation by third parties, etc.

    If it isn't about 'rewarding' teachers, why even have tenure? Just pay everyone identically and add a cost of living bump every year and be done with it.

    People respond to incentives, if you want to couple a bonus payment for working in underserved areas to performance pay, fine by me. That doesn't address the failings of tenure.

«13456711
Sign In or Register to comment.