This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.

Merit Based Teacher Pay

RymRym
edited March 2009 in Politics
So, Obama came out in favor of merit-based teacher pay.

Notable quotes:
Barack Obama[A rethinking of the traditional American school day may not be welcome -] "not in my family, and probably not in yours" [- but is critical.]
Barack ObamaWe need to make sure our students have the teacher they need to be successful. That means states and school districts taking steps to move bad teachers out of the classroom. Let me be clear: if a teacher is given a chance but still does not improve, there is no excuse for that person to continue teaching.
«1

Comments

  • It's about damn time. I have had way to many bad teachers throughout middle and high school, It would be great to have them weeded out of the educational process.
  • If it results in good teachers being paid more and bad teachers being fired he'll have my support.

    The devil will be in the details so I'm curious to see what system will be used to judge teachers. Will it be based on performance, results, test scores, graduation rates? What sort of system will be in place for a teacher to appeal their firing? Will they receive full pay while removed from their job and appealing their removal?

    What about retraining? Will the "improvement" system provide a disincentive for new teachers to enter the system with a top-notch degree knowing that they only need to fail for a short time to get the taxpayers to foot the bill for their retraining? Will they be paid during this retraining?

    I need some details.
    He only barely mentioned the reauthorization of the Bush-era No Child Left Behind Act, which introduced sweeping reforms that schools are struggling to meet without the funding to match.
  • edited March 2009
    I am all for merit-based pay, but what "merits" are being considered? If standardized test scores are the major/only factor in determining a teacher's merit - then there is a real problem.
    EDIT: Beyond that, I think all pay should be merit based. That goes for C.E.O.'s, IT people, etc.
    Post edited by Kate Monster on
  • edited March 2009
    @The Tick - You're Steve, aren't you? I mean, it's funny because I saw your name and clicked on it since I've never heard of you before, and your account profile says that you've been around since 2006, you've made hundreds of posts, and your name is "John Smith". I've been around for awhile, but I don't know a "John Smith", so I looked at some of your old posts. Sure enough, you're Steve.
    Post edited by HungryJoe on
  • I am all for merit-based pay, but what "merits" are being considered? If standardized test scores are the major/only factor in determining a teacher's merit - then there is a real problem.
    EDIT: Beyond that, I think all pay should be merit based. That goes for C.E.O.'s, IT people, etc.
    And if it's tied to NCLB, then it'll be really problematic.
  • And if it's tied to NCLB, then it'll be really problematic.
    I like Bill Gates' aggregated test score improvement and external success metrics. I'd like to hear the specifics of his studies regarding that sort of thing.
  • I am all for merit-based pay, but what "merits" are being considered? If standardized test scores are the major/only factor in determining a teacher's merit - then there is a real problem.
    Standardized tests are far from perfect. We could probably extend this thread on forever just talking about all the flaws in standardized tests.

    Despite their many flaws standardized tests are still our best tool for measuring student performance, and they work well enough for that purpose. If you look at the statistics, its all plain to see. Regardless of all the problems with the tests themselves, students being taught by better teachers do better on the standardized tests. The students at those KIPP schools are beating the ever living shit out of kids at other schools, and they most certainly are not teaching to the test.

    As a means of judging any individual student, I think that most standardized tests are fairly poor. There are just too many factors in play that can set any individual student way off course. Despite this, when you apply statistical analysis to the results of all the tests, the information is actually very reliable. You can begin to easily spot outliers and trends become painfully obvious.

    So while we should constantly try to improve standardized tests, and their many flaws, what we have right now is extremely useful for measuring student performance on a large scale, if not an individual one. And as it has been demonstrated that teacher performance has a causative relationship to student performance, you can most definitely use aggregate standardized test data to reliably measure performance over time on the teacher, school, district, state, national, and world levels.
  • edited March 2009
    There are so many problems with standardized testing (the first being that they are not given to every grade level, so pin pointing whether it was having a really awesome second grade teacher that helped the kids on the test even though the test was administered in 3rd grade would possibly give a mediochre 3rd grade teacher too much credit and the 2nd grade teacher no credit) that there is no way to use it in grading teachers with any accuracy. Standardized tests, percentage of graduation to next grade, personal improvement of student in grade level, extracurricular activities provided by faculty, percentage of interdisciplinary lessons administered, percentage of time spent utilizing/teaching technology to enhance education, etc. are all ways to "grade" a teacher. Standardized testing as it exists is simply not an acceptable tool as a major priority for grading students and less so for grading teachers.
    Post edited by Kate Monster on
  • Standardized tests, percentage of graduation to next grade, personal improvement of student in grade level, extracurricular activities provided by faculty, percentage of interdisciplinary lessons administered, percentage of time spent utilizing/teaching technology to enhance education, etc. are all ways to "grade" a teacher. Standardized testing as it exists is simply not an acceptable tool as a major priority for grading students and less so for grading teachers.
    Then how do you explain the statistically significant correllations between standardized test results and all those other factors? Why is it that the KIPP school, and others like it, dominate standardized tests? They are incredibly flawed, but they are very useful for evaluating performance in aggregate.

    One point you do make, is that if we do want to use them to evaluate individual teachers we will have to give the same tests every year in every place.
  • One point you do make, is that if we do want to use them to evaluate individual teachers we will have to give the same tests every year in every place.
    One way is to test aggregate improvement in score. Give kids a test at the start of the year per class. Give them the same (or equivalent) test at the end of the year. Never let the teacher see the test or know what's on it, beyond that it's within the scope of his curriculum.

    Base your teacher performance metrics on aggregated improvement scaled by the aggregated improvement of other teachers' classes. Remove outliers. After five or so years of this, you'll have some solid data as to which teachers are statistically significantly better than others and which teachers are statistically significantly improving.

    It's a pretty solid system. Cameras in the classroom ensure that teachers can't easily attempt to cheat by working with their students to undermine the test, no teacher's pay is pegged to a single bad crop, and teachers can't teach "to the test." All of the data is relative and aggregated. While some odd circumstances may cause a handful of teachers to "fall through the cracks," it's orders of magnitude better than the current "system."
  • One point you do make, is that if we do want to use them to evaluate individual teachers we will have to give the same tests every year in every place.
    One way is to test aggregate improvement in score. Give kids a test at the start of the year per class. Give them the same (or equivalent) test at the end of the year. Never let the teacher see the test or know what's on it, beyond that it's within the scope of his curriculum.

    Base your teacher performance metrics on aggregated improvement scaled by the aggregated improvement of other teachers' classes. Remove outliers. After five or so years of this, you'll have some solid data as to which teachers are statistically significantly better than others and which teachers are statistically significantly improving.

    It's a pretty solid system. Cameras in the classroom ensure that teachers can't easily attempt to cheat by working with their students to undermine the test, no teacher's pay is pegged to a single bad crop, and teachers can't teach "to the test." All of the data is relative and aggregated. While some odd circumstances may cause a handful of teachers to "fall through the cracks," it's orders of magnitude better than the current "system."
    I should really listen to that Bill Gates TED talk, shouldn't I? This sounds like pretty much the best idea we can have. The only issue I see is that it would take a ton of administrative work to pull it off effectively.
  • I should really listen to that Bill Gates TED talk, shouldn't I? This sounds like pretty much the best idea we can have. The only issue I see is that it would take a ton of administrative work to pull it off effectively.
    I don't often use bold and caps, but forgive me this once.

    NOT IF TECHNOLOGY IS USED PROPERLY
  • NOT IF TECHNOLOGY IS USED PROPERLY
    Hehe...good luck.
  • I should really listen to that Bill Gates TED talk, shouldn't I? This sounds like pretty much the best idea we can have. The only issue I see is that it would take a ton of administrative work to pull it off effectively.
    I don't often use bold and caps, but forgive me this once.

    NOT IF TECHNOLOGY IS USED PROPERLY
    I work for the state. Forgive my cynicism, but it's rooted in experience. At least for the time being, a lot of issues are rooted in the fact that the upper level administration, who can make the decisions, are incredibly set in their ways, and are unwilling to budge. It's also next to impossible to get rid of people. Fun times.

    But we do need to keep pushing the technology front. Eventually, the current generation (and the previous generation) will make it to the top, and they'll be able to implement things.
  • I should really listen to that Bill Gates TED talk, shouldn't I? This sounds like pretty much the best idea we can have. The only issue I see is that it would take a ton of administrative work to pull it off effectively.
    I don't often use bold and caps, but forgive me this once.

    NOT IF TECHNOLOGY IS USED PROPERLY
    And how will we pay for this when we can barely outfit schools, pay teachers well, etc.?
    I am all for it, trust me, but NCLB has shown that putting too much of an importance on standardized tests as they exist now will only further hamper the system and educators.
    I like Rym's suggestion as long as the test covered the areas required by National/State curriculum standards (every teacher should have some wiggle room to teach more than the basic curriculum based on their students' abilities and needs). The only issue is students that move mid-year or teachers that take long leaves of absence (for illness, specialized grant work, or family leave) should just stay at their same rate if judged solely on the test scores (neither going up or down).
  • Computers are cheap and easy to setup and use if you actually put technologically capable people in positions of decision making power.
  • edited March 2009
    I like Rym's suggestion as long as the test covered the areas required by National/State curriculum standards (every teacher should have some wiggle room to teach more than the basic curriculum based on their students' abilities and needs).
    I agree. For instance, special education teachers should have special guidelines. Depending on the disability, a special ed student might improve far less in a year than a non-special ed student, but a little progress in that case would still be a huge victory. Also, there are some students who will never improve despite any teacher's efforts. And parents are just as culpable in the equation; the best teacher in the world will still have to flunk a student whose parent doesn't enforce homework policies.
    Post edited by Jason on
  • technologically capable people in positions of decision making power.

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
  • the best teacher in the world will still have to flunk a student whose parent doesn't enforce homework policies.
    Homework shouldn't be a factor in grades for students who can make due without the homework. Recall my "no homework" policy. ^_~ I dared my teachers to fail me.
  • the best teacher in the world will still have to flunk a student whose parent doesn't enforce homework policies.
    Homework shouldn't be a factor in grades for students who can make due without the homework. Recall my "no homework" policy. ^_~ I dared my teachers to fail me.
    Every 9 weeks period, in quite a few of my classes, we were given the equivalent of two test grades, the scores depending on if our notebook was kept in order. This occurred frequently throughout high school.
  • the best teacher in the world will still have to flunk a student whose parent doesn't enforce homework policies.
    Homework shouldn't be a factor in grades for students who can make due without the homework. Recall my "no homework" policy. ^_~ I dared my teachers to fail me.
    Every 9 weeks period, in quite a few of my classes, we were given the equivalent of two test grades, the scores depending on if our notebook was kept in order. This occurred frequently throughout high school.
    Wow, really? That almost makes sense if you're keeping a lab notebook or something, but notes are a personal. How do you objectively assess the organization of someone's notebook?

    They used to do that to me in Catholic school, but that's sort of expected in that environment.
  • Every 9 weeks period, in quite a few of my classes, we were given the equivalent of two test grades, the scores depending on if our notebook was kept in order. This occurred frequently throughout high school.
    Wow, really? That almost makes sense if you're keeping a lab notebook or something, but notes are apersonal. How do you objectively assess the organization of someone's notebook?

    They used to do that to me in Catholic school, but that's sort of expected in that environment.
    Back when I was in high school, my teachers did something similar. In my case, it was every month instead of every nine weeks and only a "daily" grade. Their only requirement was that you wrote lecture notes.
  • edited March 2009
    the best teacher in the world will still have to flunk a student whose parent doesn't enforce homework policies.
    Homework shouldn't be a factor in grades for students who can make due without the homework. Recall my "no homework" policy. ^_~ I dared my teachers to fail me.
    Every 9 weeks period, in quite a few of my classes, we were given the equivalent of two test grades, the scores depending on if our notebook was kept in order. This occurred frequently throughout high school.
    Wow, really? That almost makes sense if you're keeping a lab notebook or something, but notes are apersonal. How do you objectively assess the organization of someone's notebook?

    They used to do that to me in Catholic school, but that's sort of expected in that environment.
    We had that for our "School diaries" (Business style diaries, not like personal journals) In the form of a competition at the end of the year on whose diary was best kept. I won yearly passes to a theme park two years in a row by just noting all of my homework and such down, and then writing them all in the journal at the end of the year, with various made up notes and thoughts(all school acceptable) and some small, tasteful artwork drawn by a friend of mine who went to a different high school.
    Unfortunately, my streak was broken when everyone figured out the trick, a random person won that year, and then they never did it again.
    Post edited by Churba on
  • the best teacher in the world will still have to flunk a student whose parent doesn't enforce homework policies.
    Homework shouldn't be a factor in grades for students who can make due without the homework. Recall my "no homework" policy. ^_~ I dared my teachers to fail me.
    You are not an average student. Most students need homework. They need the practice. They need the extra instruction -- especially special education students. Think: What if your IQ were 50 points lower and your cognitive impairment caused problems with two or more lifeskills? You would not learn as quickly. You would need more time and more practice to achieve the minimum requirements of standardized education. Come down off your high horse and think about the rest of society. There are others out there with real educational needs. Not giving them homework would be like not giving you a computer.
  • edited March 2009
    Every 9 weeks period, in quite a few of my classes, we were given the equivalent of two test grades, the scores depending on if our notebook was kept in order. This occurred frequently throughout high school.
    Wow, really? That almost makes sense if you're keeping a lab notebook or something, but notes are apersonal. How do you objectively assess the organization of someone's notebook?

    They used to do that to me in Catholic school, but that's sort of expected in that environment.
    Back when I was in high school, my teachers did something similar. In my case, it was every month instead of every nine weeks and only a "daily" grade. Their only requirement was that you wrote lecture notes.
    We were given a list of the order all of the graded worksheets and class notes we had had to go in. I'm sorry, but I just see no reason to keep all of those damned worksheets, and most of the time, I had such simple classes I didn't need to take notes. Plus, since when did my notebook organization teach me anything about government, math, literature, and history, especially for the equivalent of two chapters of learning.
    Post edited by Vhdblood on
  • You are not an average student. Most students need homework. They need the practice. They need the extra instruction -- especially special education students. Think: What if your IQ were 50 points lower and your cognitive impairment caused problems with two or more lifeskills? You would not learn as quickly. You would need more time and more practice to achieve the minimum requirements of standardized education. Come down off your high horse and think about the rest of society. There are others out there with real educational needs. Not giving them homework would be like not giving you a computer.
    This is why wee need to stratify education based on student ability. If I don't need homework to succeed, I should not be in a class with someone who does. Rather than worrying about not leaving any child behind, we should instead try to push every student forwards as quickly and as far as possible.
  • technologically capable people in positions of decision making power.

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
    You know what, I have to agree with this. Our tech people at school do have pretty good tech knowledge, especially compared to other schools in the area. On the other hand, I see them doing a lot of things ineffectively and not knowing what to do in some fairly basic situations, so I wouldn't really trust them with important decisions.

    Not saying, Joe, that I'm smarter than them...I'm just saying that they're indeed far from someone who should be put in the seat of decision making power.
  • This is why wee need to stratify education based on student ability. If I don't need homework to succeed, I should not be in a class with someone who does. Rather than worrying about not leaving any child behind, we should instead try to push every student forwards as quickly and as far as possible.
    Or we could abandon academics entirely.

    I'm not trying to be sarcastic. I read a book some years ago called The Mocking Program, by Alan Dean Foster. The story is about something else entirely, but he describes an educational system that stuck with me. In this system, the only academics taught are the most basic skills (reading, writing, basic math, etc). The rest of a child's education is devoted entirely to learning social skills, starting with utilizing emergency services and progressing through things like advanced financial planning. Any academic interests are left entirely up to the parents to work out with their child, and can be learned through courses taught online.

    A system like this is already technologically feasible, and could help to solve problems like young adults getting themselves into massive financial trouble because they don't know any better. People would still get themselves into trouble, of course, but they'd have less of an excuse.

  • A system like this is already technologically feasible, and could help to solve problems like young adults getting themselves into massive financial trouble because they don't know any better. People would still get themselves into trouble, of course, but they'd have less of an excuse.
    That sounds like a system that's great at making functional if mediocre automatons bound to the society in which they are born.

    Personally, I'd rather at least try to hold people to a higher standard than "don't die or break anything."
  • The rest of a child's education is devoted entirely to learning social skills, starting with utilizing emergency services and progressing through things like advanced financial planning.
    This would be good in a static society. Unfortunately life moves more quickly. There's no point teaching advanced financial planning on the system in place in 2007 when the financial institutions and associated risks are completely rearranged by 2009. You need to teach people how to learn, and to be responsible for ongoing learning. Teaching them history is a good place to start, or else nobody will know what mistakes to avoid.
Sign In or Register to comment.