3 ms·

The general idea you're getting at, incentivize teacher performance, rests on the underlying assumption that a "great teacher" can have an outsized impact on st

The general idea you're getting at, incentivize teacher performance, rests on the underlying assumption that a "great teacher" can have an outsized impact on students outcomes in the one year they're teaching the student. Much of the US tried to find evidence of this in the 2000s and failed. Past the basic "does the teacher understand the material?" level, outcomes on a year-long basis are dominated by: - Home life (food, safety, parent engagement, socioeconomic background) - Classroom size (smaller is better) Teacher incentivization might work if students spent more years with individual students but that has a different set of problems and requires a much larger reform of schools.

peterfirefly 4y ago
Classroom size does not actually matter much. Teachers unions love smaller classrooms, though... Your first item -- which is really many items -- does matter. Especially if we open about the fact that "socioeconomic background" is mainly a (poor) proxy for the students' IQ. We know this, because grades track the students' IQ better than their socioeconomic background or the IQ of their parents. "Does the teacher understand the material?" is a low bar but one that many teachers don't clear. This is something that could actually realistically be fixed.
- Hermitian909 4y ago
  Classroom size absolutely matters, at the extreme you encounter Bloom's 2 sigma[0] around ratios of 3:1. Small classes get you two things: 1. Easier classroom management 2. More individualized education (1) is good and has some effect, but (2) is the meat and potatoes. I will grant the effects are not linear and so haggling about 16-24 kids may not be worth it but the difference between 20 kids and 10 is enormous. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloom%27s_2_sigma_problem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloom%27s_2_sigma_problem
  - timthorn 4y ago
    There's been some good research in the UK about the impact of class size in schools there. The summary is that it is unlikely to be the most effective way of improving outcomes: https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/education-evidence/teaching-learning-toolkit/reducing-class-size https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/education-eviden... https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/class-size-and-education-in-england-evidence-report https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/class-size-and-ed...
- tstrimple 4y ago
  Classroom size matters a whole lot if you're expecting teachers to give special attention to struggling students to make up for parental deficiencies.
  - WalterBright 4y ago
    My proposal doesn't expect anything. It just gives a bonus if the kid reaches grade level. Leave it entirely up to the teacher as to how to achieve that, or not. I bet the teachers will find a way. Greed is funny that way :-)
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
- tptacek 4y ago
  None of these assertions about SES and IQ are supported with citations, which is unsurprising because they're unlikely to be true: instead, we have studies that show the opposite thing (see, for instance, Turkheimer).
WalterBright 4y ago
Monetary incentivization works quite well in the economy. The idea that it can't work with teachers is hard to believe. I've paid for instruction for various things. You bet there's a big difference in ability to teach from person to person. The ones that are good get paid well because they are in demand. The ones who aren't good, well, they wind up trying another career. Besides, if teachers don't matter, might as well hire a chimpanzee to run the class.
- tomcam 4y ago
  > The ones who aren't good, well, they wind up trying another career. I think that maybe those who can't, well...
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

peterfirefly 4y ago

Classroom size does not actually matter much. Teachers unions love smaller classrooms, though... Your first item -- which is really many items -- does matter. Especially if we open about the fact that "socioeconomic background" is mainly a (poor) proxy for the students' IQ. We know this, because grades track the students' IQ better than their socioeconomic background or the IQ of their parents. "Does the teacher understand the material?" is a low bar but one that many teachers don't clear. This is something that could actually realistically be fixed.

Hermitian909 4y ago
Classroom size absolutely matters, at the extreme you encounter Bloom's 2 sigma[0] around ratios of 3:1. Small classes get you two things: 1. Easier classroom management 2. More individualized education (1) is good and has some effect, but (2) is the meat and potatoes. I will grant the effects are not linear and so haggling about 16-24 kids may not be worth it but the difference between 20 kids and 10 is enormous. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloom%27s_2_sigma_problem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloom%27s_2_sigma_problem
- timthorn 4y ago
  There's been some good research in the UK about the impact of class size in schools there. The summary is that it is unlikely to be the most effective way of improving outcomes: https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/education-evidence/teaching-learning-toolkit/reducing-class-size https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/education-eviden... https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/class-size-and-education-in-england-evidence-report https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/class-size-and-ed...
tstrimple 4y ago
Classroom size matters a whole lot if you're expecting teachers to give special attention to struggling students to make up for parental deficiencies.
- WalterBright 4y ago
  My proposal doesn't expect anything. It just gives a bonus if the kid reaches grade level. Leave it entirely up to the teacher as to how to achieve that, or not. I bet the teachers will find a way. Greed is funny that way :-)
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
tptacek 4y ago
None of these assertions about SES and IQ are supported with citations, which is unsurprising because they're unlikely to be true: instead, we have studies that show the opposite thing (see, for instance, Turkheimer).

WalterBright 4y ago

Monetary incentivization works quite well in the economy. The idea that it can't work with teachers is hard to believe. I've paid for instruction for various things. You bet there's a big difference in ability to teach from person to person. The ones that are good get paid well because they are in demand. The ones who aren't good, well, they wind up trying another career. Besides, if teachers don't matter, might as well hire a chimpanzee to run the class.

tomcam 4y ago
> The ones who aren't good, well, they wind up trying another career. I think that maybe those who can't, well...

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]