Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
you seem to think I don't agree with merit pay. i never said any such thing.
i think you're making this seem way too easy. no amount of teaching can overcome a crappy home life (which is a whole other discussion in and of itself) and I think it's simplistic to say standardized test scores should be the benchmark across the board. i don't believe scores on a test mean anything - all it does it drive behavior to teach to the test.
what about children in lower grades who do not take standardized tests? how do those teachers get evaluated?
why is hope and change NOT good except for education?
I have no idea where you stand on merit pay, I am responding to you point by point. If your objections appear to indicate you are against merit pay, it is the way you are presenting your response. I in no way in any of my responses addressed where you stand on the issue, only your arguements.
Again I do not think it is easy. See my response above. That is why incentive pay is needed. If it were easy this thread would not exist.
Test scores may not mean anything but there has to be an objective way to determine if children are learning what they are supposed to. If you have a better way than testing I am all ears. As for teaching to the test, so what? Is it really a bad thing if the children learn what they are tested on? Better than where they stand now.
also, a serious question - how do you implement merit pay? how on earth can you possibly compare a teacher in a bad school in newark to a teacher in a wealthy suburb like millburn?
hate to say it, but typical christie - big on rhetoric, light on details.
No need for merit pay. At all. Do your job and teach. If some bonus is going to make you a "better" teacher b/c there's a carrot dangling in front of your cart, you're in the wrong field. If you are just an excellent teacher all around, isn't that why you got into the field to begin with?
The main difference is that if the companies compensation structure is inefficient, they go out of business. If the government's compensation structure is inefficient, they take more money from the tax payer. (put it another way, the diff between govt and business is that govt doesn't go out of business)
And if a school district is under-performing, by test scores, public schools and BOE's tend to think a new gym/better fields/new $20M school with all the bells and whistles are going to change what walks through those doors. But it never does.
I would think score improvements within a given class in a given school would do the trick. No need to compare Newark to Milburn. How about Newark simply show improvement.
LOLOLOL!!! Very very funny, the sad part is this make too much sense. What will happen is rating schools on state testing. Therefore its alll a sham. Rich districts will benefit while poor school will.....continue to fail.
The portfolio assessment you speak of would be great. When you have politicians running schools this is what you get.
I have a novel idea. Lets reward good parents. I am sure most of you know what I am talking about. The parents who sit down with kids,stay married,teach morality,show love,are home,stress education,dont have 6 kids,help with homework,participate in school functions. Most kids in urban schools just lack these simple things. Not to say suburban kids get all of these things but the % is much higher. Show me a good student and 9 times out of 10 I will show you a good parent. Why is it that all failing schools are in urban areas? Let me guess all urban teachers are bad? Kind of like why we have more crime in urban areas. Must be we have worse cops in those areas?? I guess so. I do think public schools must do a much better job of spending tax payer money. The thing is we need to stop blaming urban teachers and realize the true problems that face our society. The same problems police officers face on the street in urban areas are exactly the problems teachers deal with in those same areas. The fact remains its easier to blame teachers and not parents and not our society as a whole.
the whole pay tied to test scores thing is bogus. There are many schools in the state that pull from poor areas where the parents have little involvement in their kids education. My wife teache sin once such school. Half her class is special needs or cant speak english...in kindergarten
We could get rid of the closed shop and let any qualified teacher seek employment in the school system. Competition works for every other industry, why shouldn't it work for teachers? I don't see why you have to be a part of any union to teach children effectively. In a free country, all organizational memberships should be voluntary, including membership in the teachers union.
I agree with this completely. The difficulty in implementing it, and the source of reams of complaints, will be that the richest towns will have more money to spend on teachers, and will terefore be able to hire the best teachers, leaving the less qualified to teach in the poor towns or districts, perpetuating the poor performance of those districts. How do we get past that?
I agree with this completely. The difficulty in implementing it, and the source of reams of complaints, will be that the richest towns will have more money to spend on teachers, and will terefore be able to hire the best teachers, leaving the less qualified to teach in the poor towns or districts, perpetuating the poor performance of those districts. How do we get past that?
Merit pay with a twist. Teachers that agree to work in districts that have the lowest test scores get paid way more than teachers who work in the best school districts. The employer (in this case the state) should have the right to freely set salary scales based on supply and demand. The demand for good teachers in districts where the students are of lower quality is higher. Teachers willing to work in those districts should get paid double or triple what teachers get in Millburn, for example. If this were set up properly, the money would draw the talent where it needs to go, like money always does. If I am a teacher and I can make $135,000 in a school district where graduation rates are 40% compared with $72,500 in schools where the graduation rates are 98%, where would I teach? A few will choose the softer existence in Millburn, however a good percentage of very talented teachers would chase the money and work in Irvington. So many, in fact, that teachers selected for Irvington would have to compete for the openings based on their performance. I know darn well, there would be NO teacher openings in Irvington if the pay at those schools were double or even triple what they were in the better districts.
Would the teachers union ever consent to this? Not in a million years. However, if membership in the union were voluntary rather than mandatory, individual teachers would be able to make the correct decision and seek out the positions in the tougher schools and opt out of union membership. Voila, the union has lost its evil power to maintain the status quo and feather its own bed.
Oh, and TENURE would be GONZO. No more tenure. How insane that certain non-performing dinosauric teachers get to keep their jobs because they've been around a long time. There are no guarantees in any employment. Nor should there be in teaching. How did we EVER agree to tenure?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
