Anonymous wrote:I would be worried word would get out to parents and teachers that Mrs. A gets paid more than Mrs. B and then there would be a fight among parents for Mrs. A. Also, Mrs. B may be jealous of Mrs. A and not want to work constructively with her on curriculum planning and particular students they share. Since not all children can get Mrs. A, this system doesn't work.

Mrs. B being jealous of Mrs. A and refusing to work with her is just a good indication that Mrs. B is in the wrong field and needs to leave teaching.

How do people in other professions manage to work with people who earn more or less than they do? Are teachers so petty that it's an impossibility for them to imagine that someone might be better (or have more recognizably better skills in particular areas) or worse (or have fewer recognizably better skills) than they are?

I work in a merit pay based system. It is not "fair" in the sense that everyone would agree about how the merit pay is allocated and judged. But the metrics are understandable, even if they can't possibly cover everything and tend to cover measurable things even when those things aren't the most important aspects of the job. So in that sense it is fair. It's not fair in the sense that everyone would always be judged the same no matter what - different supervisors rate people differently. It's part of life. It's fascinating that teachers find that unfathomable (although early child care workers and university professors seem less befuddled by the concept).

Parents should be able to provide feedback on a teacher but I oppose them having any say on their salary.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a teacher, don't you also see some practical difficulties with parents and other teachers if you are paid more or less than they are?

But I already am paid more/less than other teachers. The teacher next door with the same workload gets paid $30k more than I do, since he's been there 20 years longer than me.

Ok. True. But that's across the board for all employees and no one is judging you less than an older teacher other than their knowledge that you have less years of experience. If that was changed though so that you got more money than the other teacher due to merit, would there be any issues that would arise in your school because of this?

I wouldn't think it would be public information who was paid what. The salary scale would be updated to say "Base pay = $xx,xxx" "Average = +x", "Above average = +xx", "Superior = +xxx", "Department chair = +xx" "Club lead = +xx", etc. Unless you knew the teacher's ratings, you wouldn't know what they were paid.

That said, I think merit pay is impossible to implement in a school setting. Our department is repeatedly praised for its collaboration and shared ownership of kids. I tutor the other teachers' kids during after school, they remediate mine during intervention. We share collective responsibility for the success and failures of ALL students taking our subject, whether they are on our roster or not.

If you dangle $10k in front of us, promised to the teacher with the highest test scores, I guarantee you some of that collaboration would dwindle. I also promise you that 90% of our school would transfer to a school with a higher HHI, because while I adore my school and value working with underprivileged kids, I know that our test scores will never look like McLean's, no matter what we do.

The only way I can see it working is to do what has been mentioned upthread: pay people for additional responsibilities. Right now, team leads and department chairs at my school get paid $400 a year for their work. It's a joke, and comes down to pennies on the hour for the amount of work required.

Is this high school and is it in Fairfax County? I know elementary team and curriculum leads do not receive any extra $.

FCPS middle school. It is proncipal's discretion how to allot the funds. At the other school I was at, team leads got nothing.

Anonymous wrote:As a current teacher, I think that the idea of merit pay would be difficult to implement. Some teach the non-TAG kids: the kids with special needs; the English language learners, and the kids with no support at home. The teachers with the TAG kids obviously have higher SOL scores. The TAG kids do their homework because they (often) have parents who make sure they do it and and are (often) more excited by learning because it's easier for them, etc. How are you going to decide which of these teachers is doing a better job?

I think you need to look more inclusively not just at test scores and progress but by observations, parental survey's and progress of the individual students. You are always going to get a mix of kids and that's part of teaching. At our school, my SN kid is except from testing (which makes no sense when his test scores on the one test he did do was very good). So, they always have loopholes. I'd like to have input into my children's teachers ratings. Teachers who do extra deserve the merit pay... those that work with and other professionals involved with the kids, those who engage parents in the classroom and let parents know what is going on, those who really teach vs. lump kids together based off what is easiest and meet individual kids needs, etc. We've had great teachers where I know what is going on and feel really a part of my child's education and we work together. It makes it better when what we supplement at home is equal or a bit ahead of what is done at school. This year, no parent/teacher conference, I have no idea what is going on in the classroom, teacher will not speak with outside professionals who have worked with my child for years, has her in a reading and math group way below her ability and never corrects work or helps while they are doing it. There are several teachers and aides and a small class size so there is no excuse for what is going on. Teachers like that should not be rewarded. Our principal thinks very highly of the classroom and has no idea what others think.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a teacher, don't you also see some practical difficulties with parents and other teachers if you are paid more or less than they are?

If you want a higher income, then you need to change professions. You cannot complain someone else is making more money when you choose the profession.

The question was related to higher pay for merit. I'm not sure how your comment pertains to my question.

Anonymous wrote:As a teacher, don't you also see some practical difficulties with parents and other teachers if you are paid more or less than they are?

If you want a higher income, then you need to change professions. You cannot complain someone else is making more money when you choose the profession.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a teacher, don't you also see some practical difficulties with parents and other teachers if you are paid more or less than they are?

But I already am paid more/less than other teachers. The teacher next door with the same workload gets paid $30k more than I do, since he's been there 20 years longer than me.

Ok. True. But that's across the board for all employees and no one is judging you less than an older teacher other than their knowledge that you have less years of experience. If that was changed though so that you got more money than the other teacher due to merit, would there be any issues that would arise in your school because of this?

I wouldn't think it would be public information who was paid what. The salary scale would be updated to say "Base pay = $xx,xxx" "Average = +x", "Above average = +xx", "Superior = +xxx", "Department chair = +xx" "Club lead = +xx", etc. Unless you knew the teacher's ratings, you wouldn't know what they were paid.

That said, I think merit pay is impossible to implement in a school setting. Our department is repeatedly praised for its collaboration and shared ownership of kids. I tutor the other teachers' kids during after school, they remediate mine during intervention. We share collective responsibility for the success and failures of ALL students taking our subject, whether they are on our roster or not.

If you dangle $10k in front of us, promised to the teacher with the highest test scores, I guarantee you some of that collaboration would dwindle. I also promise you that 90% of our school would transfer to a school with a higher HHI, because while I adore my school and value working with underprivileged kids, I know that our test scores will never look like McLean's, no matter what we do.

The only way I can see it working is to do what has been mentioned upthread: pay people for additional responsibilities. Right now, team leads and department chairs at my school get paid $400 a year for their work. It's a joke, and comes down to pennies on the hour for the amount of work required.

Is this high school and is it in Fairfax County? I know elementary team and curriculum leads do not receive any extra $.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a teacher, don't you also see some practical difficulties with parents and other teachers if you are paid more or less than they are?

But I already am paid more/less than other teachers. The teacher next door with the same workload gets paid $30k more than I do, since he's been there 20 years longer than me.

Ok. True. But that's across the board for all employees and no one is judging you less than an older teacher other than their knowledge that you have less years of experience. If that was changed though so that you got more money than the other teacher due to merit, would there be any issues that would arise in your school because of this?

I wouldn't think it would be public information who was paid what. The salary scale would be updated to say "Base pay = $xx,xxx" "Average = +x", "Above average = +xx", "Superior = +xxx", "Department chair = +xx" "Club lead = +xx", etc. Unless you knew the teacher's ratings, you wouldn't know what they were paid.

That said, I think merit pay is impossible to implement in a school setting. Our department is repeatedly praised for its collaboration and shared ownership of kids. I tutor the other teachers' kids during after school, they remediate mine during intervention. We share collective responsibility for the success and failures of ALL students taking our subject, whether they are on our roster or not.

If you dangle $10k in front of us, promised to the teacher with the highest test scores, I guarantee you some of that collaboration would dwindle. I also promise you that 90% of our school would transfer to a school with a higher HHI, because while I adore my school and value working with underprivileged kids, I know that our test scores will never look like McLean's, no matter what we do.

The only way I can see it working is to do what has been mentioned upthread: pay people for additional responsibilities. Right now, team leads and department chairs at my school get paid $400 a year for their work. It's a joke, and comes down to pennies on the hour for the amount of work required.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a teacher, don't you also see some practical difficulties with parents and other teachers if you are paid more or less than they are?

But I already am paid more/less than other teachers. The teacher next door with the same workload gets paid $30k more than I do, since he's been there 20 years longer than me.

Ok. True. But that's across the board for all employees and no one is judging you less than an older teacher other than their knowledge that you have less years of experience. If that was changed though so that you got more money than the other teacher due to merit, would there be any issues that would arise in your school because of this?

Anonymous wrote:As a teacher, don't you also see some practical difficulties with parents and other teachers if you are paid more or less than they are?

But I already am paid more/less than other teachers. The teacher next door with the same workload gets paid $30k more than I do, since he's been there 20 years longer than me.

As a teacher, don't you also see some practical difficulties with parents and other teachers if you are paid more or less than they are?

This. It's like apples and oranges. No way to compare how effective a teacher really is when Teacher A has a class full of kids who have stable homes, enough food in their homes and educated, tuned-in parent, and Teacher B has a class full of kids whose basic needs aren't met.

Absolutely. I've taught in both--believe me, I deserved more pay when I was working in the poor school. I also spent more of my own money there--as well as more hours of work.

Anonymous wrote:As a current teacher, I think that the idea of merit pay would be difficult to implement. Some teach the non-TAG kids: the kids with special needs; the English language learners, and the kids with no support at home. The teachers with the TAG kids obviously have higher SOL scores. The TAG kids do their homework because they (often) have parents who make sure they do it and and are (often) more excited by learning because it's easier for them, etc. How are you going to decide which of these teachers is doing a better job?

This. It's like apples and oranges. No way to compare how effective a teacher really is when Teacher A has a class full of kids who have stable homes, enough food in their homes and educated, tuned-in parent, and Teacher B has a class full of kids whose basic needs aren't met.

Anonymous wrote:I think most teachers are pretty good. The top "10%'ers" can go to the privates and can make the big bucks if money is the issue.

The focus should be on the other 10% of the spectrum. The bad teachers. They're easier to ID (start with the criminals on paid admin leave) and getting rid of the bad ones would have a much more significant effect. Just allow leadership to fire the bad ones just like we can in the real world.

Agree with this. There was an article in USA Today discussing sex offenders who got new jobs in neighboring counties and states. That shouldn't happen.

Anonymous wrote:I think most teachers are pretty good. The top "10%'ers" can go to the privates and can make the big bucks if money is the issue.

The focus should be on the other 10% of the spectrum. The bad teachers. They're easier to ID (start with the criminals on paid admin leave) and getting rid of the bad ones would have a much more significant effect. Just allow leadership to fire the bad ones just like we can in the real world.

Watch out, PP. I suggested that the other day and listed four examples of bad teachers I had known over a number of years of teaching. Teachers who should have not been there. Someone on this thread jumped all over me and denied that there were any poor teachers. Poster said I was a "busybody" for noticing. The poster claimed to be a teacher. I can only guess that it must have been a high school teacher who never left the classroom. Either that, or, perhaps a poor teacher that had been reported by a colleague.

I always have said that merit pay should start with getting rid of rubbish--not the mediocre teachers--but, just the really poor ones.