Posted on 03/15/2006 4:37:57 AM PST by summer
I'm a strong advocate of performance pay for teachers when done at the school level. Our school offers a very nice bonus to the "Teacher of the Year," and a lesser bonus to the runners up. The TOTY is voted on by the teachers themselves in a 2-level voting scheme. Yes, there's always going to be some favoritism, but that's true in industry too. At least in my memory, the TOTY bonus has never gone to someone other than a truly outstanding teacher.
While I'm on the subject, why is it that we pay large bonuses to sports coaches (admittedly who spend extra hours coaching), but nothing to outstanding teachers who spend extraordinary hours doing paperwork, grading papers, and preparing for classes? Do we value outstanding football teams and baseball players more than outstanding students? Which are going to contribute more to our society in the long run?
They could cash in their green stamps for their children's school supplies. Kids could earn them for good attendance and behavior/discipline records.
Ya, God forbid you get raises based on performance.
First, not all public school teachers are members of the N.E.A. My daughter teaches high school classes and is not a member nor are all teachers liberals. I know you haven't stated that at all but it seems to be "common knowledge" to some.
As you have already pointed out, rating a teacher's teaching ability based on how well the students do on a test does not take into consideration the ability of the students to learn to begin with. You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear, (That's my observation, not my daughter's).
My daughter also informs me that students who do well are usually the students who have parents who are involved in their education, parents who bother to show up at parent/teacher conferences,parents who impose discipline and order in their child's lives, parents who care.
In one of her classes of 30 students last year, four of the girls were pregnant, one of them with her second child. Assuming that half the class were girls, that's 4 of 15 and we may safely guess that at least as many of the boys in that class were involved with getting somebody pregnant.
In addition it's difficult to teach high school level classes to teen agers, many of whom have difficulty reading simple instructions. If a kid can't read by the time he is in high school there are only two choices, either flunk him or pass him on through the system.
There are incompetent teachers to be sure, I am positive that my daughter is not one of them, she is a frustrated teacher.
Back in the 70s I was watching news coverage of a teachers strike in Chicago. One of the reporters asked a picket sign holding teacher what her position was at the school. Her reply was, "I teaches English" Teachers who are incompetent should be fired but not on the basis of some test given to students.
"Some Teachers Say Merit Pay Plan Is a Bitter Apple [FL E-Comp Plan]
Sure. An apple tastes sour after eating cake and ice cream.
I remember when Dallas was going to have to 'let go' nearly 300 teachers due to budget concerns - then it was discovered that DISD had more or as many admins as Houston, while 1/3 the size. Needless to say, some admins lost their jobs.
I remember another survey on how much teachers pay out of their own pockets for classroom supplies - about $2000 a year.
We had a brief time of 'merit pay' here in TX - called the career ladder - based on classroom observations. I was working with some admin people on training for observations. Each of them had a spouse working in the district - and asked - since it will benefit 'my pocket', who do you think is going to get the best evaluation?
Any suggestion for merit pay has a possible backlash. If a teacher has A students, the evaluation would be good for that teacher.
Administration has been fattening up to be sure, but when the National Education Association wants the salaries of teachers to go up 19 percent in one year (an actual proposal in a school district near me) that's too much. Especially considering the average salary is over 48-thousand a year in that school district. That would mean a three million dollar expense in a school district with a 37 million dollar budget. (An eight percent budget increase just for teacher pay.)
Understood... My brother is a public school teacher in Centerville, Texas....still, there must be an effective and fair method to compensate "excellent" teachers. The problem is most are not excellent and those control the union, which controls the policy.
Poor teachers in a private school get fired.
As it stands the incentives are perverse, in most places the teachers in affluent districts working under the best conditions with the easiest to teach students are the most highly paid.
If teachers and adminsitratorshad to produce improvement in test scores to increase their income, and the greater the improvement the greater the increase, market forces should re-direct teaching talent to the places were the greatest improvement is possible, the schools and students with the lowest current relative performance.
Of course, it might be that no matter how motivated and skillful the teachers and administrators their efforts would be overwhelmed by other factors,
But if so, we would at least have a convincing demonstration of the limits of schools in effecting such improvements, and to move on with greater confidence to other sorts of efforts.
It seems that Florida is using a scale of 100-500. So, if little Billy scored 347 in 4th grade and then scored the same or higher in 5th grade, you can tell that Billy's 5th grade teacher taught Billy a full year's worth of 5th grade skills.
If Billy was the smartest kid in 4th grade and scored a 499, but only got a 378 in 5th grade you know that his fifth grade teacher didn't teach him enough.
if Billy is the class dunce, and his test the following year went up the teacher did her job, even if he started below average and is still below average.
As long as the merit pay is based on each student's score the merit pay is beneficial. You can then track how well a teacher is imparting knowledge in a tested subject. If a whole class has there test scores drop, the teacher is no good or the curriculum is horrid. If a couple scores fall, well that can be attribute to those kids. If the whole class improves, instead of staying the same, you have got a great teacher or a great curriculum and should try to replicate it in other classrooms.
You make a good point about how A students will continue to be "A" students even if they are taught in the "F" school. And I agree with you that the merit pay increase would unfairly benefit teachers with the A students.
However, merit pay tied to score improvement is still a good idea if offered only to the "F" schools and using the standardized test scores is really the only way to access merit fairly. Any other accessment could be political.
I disagree with this statement. Students rate based on easiness. Did you ever look at ratemyteacher.com?
A merit pay plan based on standardized testing could work out fine, if it incorporated a regression model of student improvement that controlled for variation in each teacher's classroom student composition. This type of model was used in Dallas several years back, but I'm not sure how it worked out.
Can someone PLEASE tell me why "teaching for the test" is a bad thing?
The only way "teaching for the test" could be bad is if the teacher somehow had prior knowledge of what questions would be on the test, so that they could repetitively drill their students on those specific questions. I'm guessing they don't know the questions beforehand.
Without knowing beforehand what the questions will be, "teaching for the test" would, of necessity, require the instructor to... (wait for it)... teach the subject material thoroughly!
I think that's the whole point. :-)
For example
“...it checks to see if a student has acquired a year's worth of knowledge, as determined by the FCAT achievement…
leaves it unclear if a teacher is eligible for a bonus if a student is performing below grade level; for example is a teacher rewarded at all for bringing a 6th grader up 18 months in tested level in a year if they are still reading at the 5th grade level?
Or, is there adjustment for the difficulty of the task?
Teachers at schools like Snively, a high-poverty school with 89 percent of its students qualified for free or reduced-price lunches, can't possibly compete for the bonuses against teachers at magnet schools, said Viola Frazier, a third-grade Snively teacher.”
IMO it’s quite possible that bringing a student reading at far below grade level at a “Snively” type school up half a grade level in a year is more of a teaching accomplishment than producing a full year's improvement in a student starting the the term at grade level at a school with more stringent entry requirements.
I don't understand the problem with "teaching to" these comprehensive tests. The tests test their knowledge of content. Kids who don't know the subject matter will do poorly; those who do will do well. Isn't that what teaching is all about?
The problem that I see with attaching merit pay to the test results is that you have to be able to follow the kids on a multi-year basis in order to determine if the teacher made a positive contribution to a child's knowledge base. If Johnnie made a 56 last year, and under Ms. Smith's tutelage made an 82 this year, then apparently, Ms. Smith deserves a merit raise. So you would have to track all of her students' progress for this year over the last (or last several).I think the "teaching to the test problem" is really a red herring.
Tell me, did everything you learn in highschool get included in the SAT? ACT? As a teacher, if your payraise depended on your kids doing well, would you bother teaching them anything other than the material that would be covered on the test? I guess this makes teaching really easy, just follow the leasson plan that the testmakers will map out and you've put yourself into the fast track for teacher of the year.
A major factor in academic performance (not politically correct or warm and fuzzy) is genetics. Some kids were born with straight As (in real academic subjects), they can do no work and still get them, it's in every cell in their body. Some just can't, no matter what.
It's not a 100% correlation; but when you're looking at averages in groups living in an area, higher economic performance in the US tends to correlate with higher intelligence which leads to cushier jobs. In a "good" school and a "bad" school you can find a few kids that disprove a notion that the school itself inhibits getting As or Fs.
Some teachers are likely more effective than others; but this is just really hard to measure. A private school has a chance to evaluate this as the private school makes decisions at the school level on pure economics if parents are discriminating customers of education.
A public school will never share these motives. And a teachers' union exists to provide safe cushy work for the lowest academic performers to set foot on a college campus - a group that is chock full of socialists to boot. There may be exceptions to this; but we're talking about some single-digit percentage (maybe low as 1%).
Imposing performance standards on public schools, though, is just punishment that will stratify payscales a bit against teaching in poor neighborhoods (low performance students). Whether the teacher union types "deserve" said punishment is a strategic/political action more than one based on education quality, unless said education quality is to be improved through punishment of teacher-union-dues-payers.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.