3 ms·
Last time this same exchange (involving the same poster) happened on here, it came out that of course there'd have to be a bunch more nuance than just "pay teac
by yamtaddle 4y ago
Last time this same exchange (involving the same poster) happened on here, it came out that of course there'd have to be a bunch more nuance than just "pay teachers a bonus for having more kids end the year on-grade-level". Which, yes, obviously there would. That was acknowledged.
But, of course, the real wrinkle is that that system, with much of that extra nuance, is what's already in use. No bonuses to teachers for doing well but teachers and admin are definitely very concerned about meeting or exceeding those targets, because there are consequences if they don't. It's literally already how we evaluate schools and teachers, and it's very much on educators' and administrators' minds.
Meanwhile, the actual way for a capable teacher to earn a bonus is... to leave teaching for something that pays better. The more bullshit process and microscope-level evaluation we apply, the more will follow that incentive, and the worse the teacher labor pool gets. If this "bonus" isn't a solid $20k/yr or more, it's not gonna keep them around, especially if we make their jobs & work environment any more annoying and abusive than they already are.
- WalterBright 4y ago> No bonuses That's not what I proposed, so "that system" is not already in use. The key feature is a monetary bonus. People love to strongly assert that they are professionals, and a performance bonus does not change their performance. I've never seen a performance bonus yet that did not improve it. (It's why, back in the Zortech days, we gave a cut of the monthly gross sales to each employee.)
- fnordpiglet 4y agoThat’s not really an answer to what I asked. What does grade level, as a term and metric, mean to you? Because in this context it means the median score on a standardized test. That it’s about 50% is structurally unsurprising.