For November's LT
Read the article from msnbc on teacher pay. Respond to the following:
1. Determine whether or not a teacher's pay should be linked to student success.
2. Develop a solution to justify an increase teacher pay and a brief explanation.
This was actually a very interesting article. Even more interesting is reading that some districts in Louisiana have been offering merit pay programs to teachers for years. While I feel that I do not have enough information to make a solid statement in favor or in opposition to this idea, I am leaning towards an oppositional stance. I understand that the motivation behind the merit pay program is to give an incentive to teachers to aim for student achievement but since when did teacher's need incentives, especially monetary/external, like our students to want to fulfill their job to the fullest. In addition to this, the motivation for teachers to strive towards student achievement should not solely lie in the supposed correlation between standardized tests and check bonuses. So maybe it may motivate some teachers but is it morally right to support teachers who may simply be working for money instead of for the greater good?
ReplyDeleteI believe that increased in teacher pay should remain as they are- based on seniority. I cannot think of an argument at the moment to justify an increase in pay particularly based solely on standardized tests. Perhaps there could be some other compensation...
To be honest, I am not exactly sure where I stand on the issue. I understand both sides... and think that if used effectively, I see a merit system as a way to increase successful instruction and to reward good teachers.
ReplyDeleteWhat scares me more is that if teachers know what behaviors are desired, we might continue to water-down the already floundering education system here in the US. If merit pay is based on test scores or certain measures, teachers will again become focused on these issues. I think that in doing so, education is truly failing to spark a passion or and interest in learning among its students. Why teach students to be creative when I can spend more time teaching to the test? Or, why don't I just give my studnets the edusoft tests to take home or let them use their textbooks to answer?
I wholeheartedly agree that other forms of rewards might be more beneficial...an extra day off. More collaboration time. I do not believe that extra pay will truly motivate many teachers to perform better. I mean, we want to move our students from extrinsic to intrinsic rewards... shouldn't we hold ourselves to the same standards?
This article reminds me a lot of the "Teachers running schools" one that we previously read. I think it looks great on paper. A great idea that not only keeps teachers in line and holds them accountable for their actions, but also rewards them for doing a fantastic job. However, just like last months article, there are too many stipulations or things that can influence whether that idea is successful or not.
ReplyDeleteAs a first year teacher, I feel I make very little progress with my kids or huge gains. Does that mean I barely will get paid? Experience weighs in heavily here. By no means is that the case for every teacher (as we have all seen in our own schools) but if we switched this system, many teachers would be discourged from teaching in their first years.
That being said, if pay was based on your students achievement in the classroom, what teachers would want to work in the schools we do? Why would you elect to work in a school years behind its peers and make very little money, when you can work in a school that has shaped and ordered children from 1st grade. Yes, this already somewhat reflects our system in general pay ideas, but this system would just solidify it.