Performance Based Teacher Bonuses

[Monk-Eye]

"Performance Based Teacher Bonuses"

The notion of performance based teacherr bonuses is retarded.

The more financially affluent schools can expect better student performance. The expectation is due in part to the disposition of the students and instruction facilitated by a nonrisk location and better paid and therefore qualified faculty.

Instructors of at risk children get no recognition.

It likely has teacher favoritism built into it.

The notion that it can be fair and impartial is pure ignorance.

 

[Patrickt]

Assuming performance can be properly defined, it can be beneficial.

 

[faithful_servant]

"Performance Based Teacher Bonuses"

The notion of performance based teacherr bonuses is retarded.

The more financially affluent schools can expect better student performance. The expectation is due in part to the disposition of the students and instruction facilitated by a nonrisk location and better paid and therefore qualified faculty.

Instructors of at risk children get no recognition.

It likely has teacher favoritism built into it.

The notion that it can be fair and impartial is pure ignorance.

So you think that poor kids hav eless ability to learn than rich kids do??? This confuses me, please explain your reasons behind this highly twisted view, because I know lots of smart poor kids and lots of dumb rich kids (also lots of dumb poor kids and smart rich kids). If a teacher can teach, then thier students can learn. Rich kids have no motivation to excel, because they can always fall back on mommy and daddy, so the teachers in affluent areas are at a substantial disadvantage. (I can twist logic, too):mrgreen:

 

[Schweddy]

I agree with Patrickt.

However, the testing should be done independently of the school system because this increases the likelihood of tampering.

 

[paulmarkj]

The performance target can be set in any way the employer or authorities decide. You would expect a 'better' school in a 'better' location with 'better' pupils to have higher performance targets. In the UK, the pupils are tested and are their results known, they are then expected to improve from that level to another (though we don't get paid any bonus).

There is no reason why you cannot give recognition to teacher of 'at risk children' or other categories. (In the UK you get extra for working with special needs pupils, for example: no extra qualification is necessary, it is recognised that such pupils increase workloads, stress, etc.)

Although 'the more financially affluent schools can expect better student performance' that is no reason why the teachers should sit on their laurels, they could easily sit back and take the money, so they should have targets that will stretch them.

I'm not saying that such schemes are perfect, but it is a bit strong to call them 'retarded'.

 

[Monk-Eye]

Location And Qualifications

"Location And Qualifications"

Assuming performance can be properly defined, it can be beneficial.

I agree with Patrickt.
However, the testing should be done independently of the school system because this increases the likelihood of tampering.

Independent assessment is good, yet Stanley Kaplan and others make tremendous amounts of money preparing students for standardized tests.
Is the increased performance a reflection on a school system, a particular teacher, or the quality of student?
There is disagreement with "teaching to the test" implying that it does not measure general knowledge. Hopefully the test does imply proficieny.

In the UK, the pupils are tested and are their results known, they are then expected to improve from that level to another (though we don't get paid any bonus).

The idea of improvement from benchmark is interesting but hardly reasonable when teaching for an average baseline, through which, specialization would seem a seldom realization.
Nurture is usually sourced through opportune mentoring, a supposition is that sophistication is cultural and rare, consider the average science fair project. Access to educated parents, or tutoring resources requiring financing, and performance expectation is the first opportunity to excel.

Even if teacher competence can be validated, student competency is also at issue. That being the case, throwing money at teachers with a pretense of rewarding the deserving superhero is foolish.

The initiating issue for me was watching the local school district superintendent pretend that something intelligent was occuring by offering performance based bonuses from a pool of taxpayer money, that likely goes to the higher performing, and likely the wealthiest paid districts.

Furthermore, the high and low performance student numbers are constantly being integrated to offset deviations of below average. The result is a bastardization of performance learning and masquerading of the problem areas.

 

[Gardener]

I think it's a great idea, myself.

Just think about it -- here where we have open enrollment, what teacher in the whole district wouldn't clamor for my six year old?

The prospect of some kickbacks is very enticing.

 

[doughgirl]

You would have teachers pitted against each other for the high achievers. Teachers refusing to go to some schools. And then again.......biased administrators picking some teachers over others.

Say you had 90 kids and three classrooms, three teachers.

Which teacher would get the top achievers? What do you do divide them all up as best you can? How does this benefit kids?

And if you teach in a large school district with hundreds of schools, (inner city) how do you make the bonuses equal among teachers who happen to teach in areas where test scores are considerably lower?

I live in Arizona. Many schools have more illegals attending them and minorities that score lower.

How do you make the playing field level?

I still think experience and the level of education a teacher has is a better way to go. You can't just go with teacher performance by measuring student achievement.

 

[talloulou]

It could be beneficial but it would have to measured in a way that there was no tampering. The bonus should be based on improvement in students performance. And kids who always perform at the top don't count as "improvements" and much like it's easier to lose 20 pounds when you're 100 pounds overweight it will be easier to get improvement out of the kids at the bottem vs those who are already above the bar.

If done right you could have teachers clamoring to teach at risk students!

 

[Alkaline]

Has anyone here had any classroom experience to base their theories on?
I'll admit that your theories would bring about good things, but you will all have trouble in implementation. My parents have been educators for years, so my arguments may be a little biased.
The fact is that despite the funding and initiatives in our public schools some kids just don't want to learn. Period. Some kids have something in their heads that they don't want to follow the rules, have respect, or become educated. It's a question of personal values.
When asked if they want an education for their children, parents will agree. When asked if their children should listen to the teacher, parents will agree. The family, generally speaking, knows that education is a ticket out of a 400$/month apartment.
Some students, on the other hand, prefer excuses and procrastination. The disruptive students have no concept of consequences. Disciplinary systems are overstressed and/or ineffective.
How can you have performance-based pay in that kind of working environment? One student has the power to disrupt the learning of the class. When there is no way to permanently stop classroom disruptions, you can not hold the teacher, through his or her paycheck, accountable to the progress of the class.

 

[Monk-Eye]

Caustic Soda

"Caustic Soda"

Has anyone here had any classroom experience to base their theories on?
I'll admit that your theories would bring about good things, but you will all have trouble in implementation. My parents have been educators for years, so my arguments may be a little biased.
...
When there is no way to permanently stop classroom disruptions, you can not hold the teacher, through his or her paycheck, accountable to the progress of the class.

You have a keen grip of classroom reality.

Too often school is institutional babysitting. And given the shortfall in parental education or time of commitment needed for academic nurturing, the duration is insufficient for working persons (especially for elementary school children where daycare is expensive) and should contain an option through 6pm or later with a bit more playground interaction, focus on the arts, and provisions for homework support.

School for the simpletons of misdirection is primarily a place to exercise feel good acceptance in tiers of the social pages. Wayward direction usually begins with untethered responsibility and submersion in negative home environments. Expectations for the importance of direction, such as whether to attend college, or the importance of the final 50 years of one's life, begins at home.

Career is a most difficult decision, partly because the age of maturity prevents one from knowing where interests lay and, once a direction towards a lifelong career is chosen, changing tracks is costly. Noone wants to accept the ridicule and blame for an intrapersonal crisis of dissatisfaction. It is too easy to be accused and blamed for bias as an outside initiator.

Yet allowing students to graduate to work as clerks, when they could have learned to draft, build, or machine makes even less sense.

I taught for about three years (chemistry, physics, mathematics). College bound students can be motivated to perform in the higher disciplines. The remainder of misdirected need to be tracked into some practical trade.

Moreover, the education system is lacking simple exercises that could convey intuition and understanding of legitimate math and science as early as grade school. However it puts off exposure until some pseudo intellectual ideal of a mature mind exists. Those designing curriculum guides are more disabled than the children.

 

[PolySciGuy]

Re: Caustic Soda

In my humble opinion, the school system does exactly what it is designed to do. It cranks out a multitude of dilligent workers that obey authority with little or no question. This should not be how schools work! Schools should teach! This is part of the reason why I advocate for the voucher system. With the voucher system, only the good schools would get funding, and how do you define a good school, whether on not it has good teachers of course! With the voucher system, the good teachers would get more funding.

 

[Jerry]

Teachers should get a standard pay plus a bonus for student achievement, much like a profit sharing bonus at a corp.

Base the bonus on student improvement, not overall performance, that way you level the paying field and focus on a teacher's ability to help a student learn.

 

[PolySciGuy]

You would have teachers pitted against each other for the high achievers. Teachers refusing to go to some schools. And then again.......biased administrators picking some teachers over others.

Say you had 90 kids and three classrooms, three teachers.

Which teacher would get the top achievers? What do you do divide them all up as best you can? How does this benefit kids?

And if you teach in a large school district with hundreds of schools, (inner city) how do you make the bonuses equal among teachers who happen to teach in areas where test scores are considerably lower?

I live in Arizona. Many schools have more illegals attending them and minorities that score lower.

How do you make the playing field level?

I still think experience and the level of education a teacher has is a better way to go. You can't just go with teacher performance by measuring student achievement.

Your Point is Very Valid, but "Performance" of a teacher should not be the grade of the student necessarily. A teacher's job is to teach and educate, I think a more accurate way to measure teacher performance would be periodic cumulative exams, that don't have to have any on the grade necessarily. What we should measure is the amount learned and the retained over a long term, or if that still doesn't bridge the "knowledge gap" try and measure improvement

 

[Patrickt]

I would start with a management performance system. What percentage of the budget is spent on the classroom and what percentage is spent on management perks? What is the ratio of number of students per employee to number of students per teacher? In principle, I see no problem with management performance standards, teacher performance standards, and student performance standards.

 

[jallman]

I would start with a management performance system. What percentage of the budget is spent on the classroom and what percentage is spent on management perks? What is the ratio of number of students per employee to number of students per teacher? In principle, I see no problem with management performance standards, teacher performance standards, and student performance standards.

I would START by giving the teachers more power to discipline the students. I would also START by creating a three strike rule: find yourself in disciplinary action three times in a year and that's it for the year. The student gets to repeat the grade. There is much more to learn in school than academics...

 

[BodiSatva]

faithful_servant
So you think that poor kids hav eless ability to learn than rich kids do??? This confuses me, please explain your reasons behind this highly twisted view, because I know lots of smart poor kids and lots of dumb rich kids (also lots of dumb poor kids and smart rich kids). If a teacher can teach, then thier students can learn. Rich kids have no motivation to excel, because they can always fall back on mommy and daddy, so the teachers in affluent areas are at a substantial disadvantage. (I can twist logic, too)

No. Poor kids have less MOTIVATION than rich kids. Guess what? This effects test scores and can be used to incorrectly judge the quality of the teacher...

Rich kids might not have the motivation either, but they generally have parents telling them that they "better" get good grades and they generally have more interactive parents that will, if nothing else, help them with their homework or study for a test...since the parent is probably better educated themselves and htey understand the importance of good grades and college...get it now? I can help more if it is needed...:2razz:

 

[Sergeant Stinger1]

Don't know about the performance based bonuses but the teachers should receive another check along with their salary:
A check for "babysitting" all the parents kids.

 

[BodiSatva]

Parents are so caught up in what they think that they need to do that they don't realize what it is that they should do...

 

[Willow]

As the parent of children who all did extremely well in school, I think I should get a bonus.:mrgreen:

 

[jallman]

As the parent of children who all did extremely well in school, I think I should get a bonus.:mrgreen:

I tend to agree with that...

 

[Flea]

Originally Posted by PolySciGuy
In my humble opinion, the school system does exactly what it is designed to do. It cranks out a multitude of dilligent workers that obey authority with little or no question. This should not be how schools work! Schools should teach! This is part of the reason why I advocate for the voucher system. With the voucher system, only the good schools would get funding, and how do you define a good school, whether on not it has good teachers of course! With the voucher system, the good teachers would get more funding.

In actuality, that is not what the school system does, that is the students that go through the system experience by not taking advantage of a free education. The system is set up so that any person can get a great education if they aspire to do so. But like most things in America, parents and kids are complacent and don't care that much. They don't understand that effort is required by them , and their kids. They assume that teachers and schools are solely responsible for educating their kids. They don't understand the gift that they are being given. People from underdevolped nations understand. Kids that come from Nepal and Africa and India...THEY UNDERSTAND and THEY KICK BUTT and take advantage of a FREE EDUCATION.

Life is what YOU make it.
Nobody gives it to you, even in a free society with a free education.
THAT is just the groundwork, the real work takes place by the individual once they enter the system.

 

[Flea]

Originally Posted by PolySciGuy
I think a more accurate way to measure teacher performance would be periodic cumulative exams, that don't have to have any on the grade necessarily.

That wont work. Most kids have no motivation to try on a test taht does not affect their grade, and so they don't. State API Tests * scores show this conclusively time and time again. Teachers should not be held accountable for test scores that their students don't care about trying on since they hold no bearing on their grades.

* Academic Performance Index (API) (CA Dept of Education)