Reply to Why do so many educated professionals look down on teachers?

Forum Index » Schools and Education General Discussion

Reply to "Why do so many educated professionals look down on teachers?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]http://www.usnews.com/news/national/articles/2009/12/21/dc-schools-chief-michelle-rhee-fights-union-over-teacher-pay

From the article:
" Chancellor Michelle Rhee is pushing innovative but contentious ideas, one of which has garnered her national attention: whether teacher pay can be tied directly to student performance."

[b]In what other industry would it be considered conentious and gain national attention if pay was tied for performance?[/quote][/b]

In what other industry is performance based on variables completely out of one's control? Do your billable hours not have enough to eat? Do they have a bed? Undiagnosed learning disabilities? Disinterested parents? A lack of background knowledge and experiences that the curriculum assumes they have? Oh, billable hours and people can't be compared? Ok, then.

Should doctors' pay be tied to the number of patients whose Type 2 diabetes they reverse? Therapists on the number of mental illnesses they cure? Dentists on the number of cavities a patient doesn't get due to their preventative education? Police officers on the number of crimes they prevent? Firefighters on the number of people who don't set their house on fire? By your logic, shouldn't their pay be tied to performance too?

As soon as other professionals who work with humans see their pay equitably tied to human performance then I'm all for it for teachers. Until then, not so much. 
[/quote]

*Standing and applauding the PP.*

Truly, imagine if medicine were based on cure rates.  We'd have a surplus of dermatologists and a dearth of oncologists.

Let's also think about the incentive structure that would be created if pay were tied to performance.  Teachers will vie for positions teaching the students most likely to succeed-- the kids who already have economic, parental, and social advantages.  The best teachers would get those jobs while the worst teachers would be left with the kids who most need a skilled, thoughtful, dedicated teacher.  Frankly, those advantaged students will pretty much succeed regardless of their teachers' ability, whereas an excellent teacher can change the life of an at-risk kid.  Teachers are not in it for the pay, and young, idealistic teachers would certainly be drawn to positions teaching the neediest kids.  But those young teachers will eventually have families and economic demands, probably right about the time they really have the experience to be at the top of their game.[/quote]

First off, let me say that I value teachers, and for the most part, respect them.  My kids have had some great teachers, but I know that there are some that are not.

And actually, using the Oncologist example, they do get evaluated on their performance.  There are Oncologists that are renowned in their field for a reason - because usually, it's based on their ability to take on the hardest of cases with good results.  People seek out the "best" Drs. all the time.  What is that "best" based on if not performance, not just on patient outcome but on their knowledge and hard work.

In the UK, for example, the Dr's are given incentive for preventitive measures.

I think it is hard to measure teachers. As PPs have noted, it's unfair to evaluate a teacher based on the performance of students that have a horrible home life.   Not sure what the best measure is, though.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics