4 ms·

It's a workable idea, but needs more development. That system incentivizes working at schools where children are already likely to be at grade level, have supp

It's a workable idea, but needs more development. That system incentivizes working at schools where children are already likely to be at grade level, have supportive parents, etc. The best teachers will flock to schools that don't really need additional help. I'd propose to spin that and base it on deltas. Taking a student that was already achieving expectations and is still doing so earns $X. Taking a student that was not meeting expectations and now is is worth 4*$X or something like that. It should be worth more to take underachieving students and get them up to expectations than it is to maintain students at an achieving level.

tstrimple 4y ago
> That system incentivizes working at schools where children are already likely to be at grade level, have supportive parents, etc. The best teachers will flock to schools that don't really need additional help. I feel like that's a problem we already have today. Parents who are motivated to get their child a good education will move to places with good educational outcomes. These parents are already invested in how well their child is doing educationally, so they have better support structures at home which is likely the largest difference in educational attainment. So parents who care and can afford to move their students to schools where the majority of other parents are also invested in the education of their children so these schools will perform well regardless of actual teacher efficacy. So good schools end up having a much higher percentage of good parents which is really what is making these good schools in the first place. If we really want to change education to improve outcomes we need to figure out either how to get parents to take some responsibility for their children or how to improve low outcome schools to the point where they are an adequate substitute for a poor parent.
- WalterBright 4y ago
  > Parents who are motivated to get their child a good education will move to places with good educational outcomes. Yeah, well, it's a big jump going from free to $17,000/year > how to improve low outcome schools to the point where they are an adequate substitute for a poor parent. Give teachers a bonus for each student that achieves at grade level. Let the teachers figure out how to do it.
  - ChainOfFools 4y ago
    > Give teachers a bonus for each student that achieves at grade level. Let the teachers figure out how to do it. As someone has already pointed out to you, what the teachers will figure out how to do is game the system in order to produce the appearance of success. Not all of them, not even perhaps a substantial majority. But enough of them will do so that the system becomes warped around reinforcing their behavior rather than the behavior the incentive is supposed to optimize for. You're a crypto nut; surely you have heard of gresham's law before.
    - WalterBright 4y ago
      > what the teachers will figure out how to do is game the system in order to produce the appearance of success. They will certainly try. However, bonus systems exist all over the place in the free market, and they work. The current system is quite thoroughly gamed in the teachers' favor by the unions.
      - tstrimple 4y ago
        And the free market is full of countless examples of those perverse incentives leading to perverse outcomes.
        WalterBright 4y ago
        The computer you're using is the result of the free market.
- everforward 4y ago
  > These parents are already invested in how well their child is doing educationally, so they have better support structures at home which is likely the largest difference in educational attainment. I do think this is an important part, I'm just not sure how to get there. I think it's at least partly wrapped up in socioeconomics. Good school districts tend to be expensive places to live. That in turn means the parents are more likely to be able to afford supplies, books, maybe a non-working parent, half-days off to see the school play, a stable work schedule, etc. Then compound that with being surrounded by children with similar parents, so peers are also likely pushed to excel. Contrast that with a single parent (23% of kids live with a single parent) who works hourly on a schedule they don't control, and is floating around the poverty level. Even if they really wanted to, I don't think they could provide the same level of support. I don't know how we fix that without dramatically changing society. Still, perfect is the enemy of good, and paying teachers bonuses for helping students achieve seems like a good step.

tstrimple 4y ago

> That system incentivizes working at schools where children are already likely to be at grade level, have supportive parents, etc. The best teachers will flock to schools that don't really need additional help. I feel like that's a problem we already have today. Parents who are motivated to get their child a good education will move to places with good educational outcomes. These parents are already invested in how well their child is doing educationally, so they have better support structures at home which is likely the largest difference in educational attainment. So parents who care and can afford to move their students to schools where the majority of other parents are also invested in the education of their children so these schools will perform well regardless of actual teacher efficacy. So good schools end up having a much higher percentage of good parents which is really what is making these good schools in the first place. If we really want to change education to improve outcomes we need to figure out either how to get parents to take some responsibility for their children or how to improve low outcome schools to the point where they are an adequate substitute for a poor parent.

WalterBright 4y ago
> Parents who are motivated to get their child a good education will move to places with good educational outcomes. Yeah, well, it's a big jump going from free to $17,000/year > how to improve low outcome schools to the point where they are an adequate substitute for a poor parent. Give teachers a bonus for each student that achieves at grade level. Let the teachers figure out how to do it.
- ChainOfFools 4y ago
  > Give teachers a bonus for each student that achieves at grade level. Let the teachers figure out how to do it. As someone has already pointed out to you, what the teachers will figure out how to do is game the system in order to produce the appearance of success. Not all of them, not even perhaps a substantial majority. But enough of them will do so that the system becomes warped around reinforcing their behavior rather than the behavior the incentive is supposed to optimize for. You're a crypto nut; surely you have heard of gresham's law before.
  - WalterBright 4y ago
    > what the teachers will figure out how to do is game the system in order to produce the appearance of success. They will certainly try. However, bonus systems exist all over the place in the free market, and they work. The current system is quite thoroughly gamed in the teachers' favor by the unions.
    - tstrimple 4y ago
      And the free market is full of countless examples of those perverse incentives leading to perverse outcomes.
      - WalterBright 4y ago
        The computer you're using is the result of the free market.
everforward 4y ago
> These parents are already invested in how well their child is doing educationally, so they have better support structures at home which is likely the largest difference in educational attainment. I do think this is an important part, I'm just not sure how to get there. I think it's at least partly wrapped up in socioeconomics. Good school districts tend to be expensive places to live. That in turn means the parents are more likely to be able to afford supplies, books, maybe a non-working parent, half-days off to see the school play, a stable work schedule, etc. Then compound that with being surrounded by children with similar parents, so peers are also likely pushed to excel. Contrast that with a single parent (23% of kids live with a single parent) who works hourly on a schedule they don't control, and is floating around the poverty level. Even if they really wanted to, I don't think they could provide the same level of support. I don't know how we fix that without dramatically changing society. Still, perfect is the enemy of good, and paying teachers bonuses for helping students achieve seems like a good step.