4 ms·

One of the problems is that in education performance is equaled to students test results so as result teachers would have an incentive to be just "test-oriented

by lazyant 17y ago

One of the problems is that in education performance is equaled to students test results so as result teachers would have an incentive to be just "test-oriented".

catzaa 17y ago
How can you improve something if you cannot measure it? How do you know that you actually improved something? Maybe tests can be improved - but it is currently the only reliable way in which the performance of students can be measured.
barry-cotter 17y ago
We find no evidence of any adverse consequences as a result of the incentive programs. Incentive schools do significantly better on both mechanical components of the test (designed to reflect rote learning) and conceptual components of the test (designed to capture deeper understanding of the material),suggesting that the gains in test scores represent an actual increase in learning outcomes. Students in incentive schools do significantly better not only in math and language (for which there were incentives), but also in science and social studies (for which there were no incentives), suggesting positive spillover effects....
- aik 17y ago
  It was only a 2 year study and the first year had no positive results. A teacher motivated by incentives receives their motivation externally. Motivation in such a form is never sustainable I don't believe. Over time, I would expect the motivation teachers receive from incentives would decrease over time.
  - yummyfajitas 17y ago
    Even if it works only for years 1-5 of a teacher's career, it would still be useful. If we combine an incentive plan with a plan to keep most teachers in this window (i.e., get rid of teachers after year 6), it could be fantastically useful. Though I must admit, I don't really buy your thesis that incentives only work short term. If they did, you'd expect entrepreneurs to be unmotivated beyond the short term, for example.
    - gjm11 17y ago
      i.e., get rid of teachers after year 6: Is it your opinion that teachers learn nothing in the course of doing their job?
      - yummyfajitas 17y ago
        It is my opinion that teachers learn nothing useful after 2 years. One source (among many others): http://notebook.lausd.net/pls/ptl/docs/PAGE/CA_LAUSD/FLDR_ORGANIZATIONS/FLDR_PLCY_RES_DEV/PAR_DIVISION_MAIN/RESEARCH_PLANNING/PUBLICATIONS/REPORTS/PAU%20PAY%20%26%20PERFORM.PDF http://notebook.lausd.net/pls/ptl/docs/PAGE/CA_LAUSD/FLDR_OR... So I suppose that a more careful cost-benefit analysis needs to be made.
        gjm11 17y ago
        Let's suppose that the results of that study are accurate and generalizable, so that (1) teachers with at most two years of experience are dramatically worse than ones with three or more, but that beyond that there's no advantage to having more. And let's suppose that although the study talks about "less than three years experience" and is written as if there's no such thing as a teacher with less than one year of experience, what they actually mean is "first two years", "next two years", etc. So. You are proposing to throw teachers out after six years of teaching. Then, assuming every teacher stays the full six years, 1/3 of all teachers will be in that low-experience category that teaches so much less effectively. At present, according to the study you cited, the figure is more like 1/5. It seems that your proposal will result in 65% more pupils being taught by teachers who do not do a good job. This is not the only reason why your suggestion seems to me unlikely to be a good one, but it seems a pretty compelling reason.
    - aik 17y ago
      Why would entrepreneurs lose their motivation? Entrepreneurs are working for themselves, not for some chunk of change someone else will give them if they perform as well as some random person wants them to. If we get rid of teachers after 6 years, what would that teacher do? How would this work exactly?
aik 17y ago
Exactly my thought. Hence the situation the US is in now - teachers don't get paid for performance, but school districts do and they force all kinds of behavior on teachers, namely teach how to pass THE-CURRENT-IMPORTANT-TEST.

by lazyant 17y ago

One of the problems is that in education performance is equaled to students test results so as result teachers would have an incentive to be just "test-oriented".

catzaa 17y ago

How can you improve something if you cannot measure it? How do you know that you actually improved something? Maybe tests can be improved - but it is currently the only reliable way in which the performance of students can be measured.

barry-cotter 17y ago

We find no evidence of any adverse consequences as a result of the incentive programs. Incentive schools do significantly better on both mechanical components of the test (designed to reflect rote learning) and conceptual components of the test (designed to capture deeper understanding of the material),suggesting that the gains in test scores represent an actual increase in learning outcomes. Students in incentive schools do significantly better not only in math and language (for which there were incentives), but also in science and social studies (for which there were no incentives), suggesting positive spillover effects....

aik 17y ago
It was only a 2 year study and the first year had no positive results. A teacher motivated by incentives receives their motivation externally. Motivation in such a form is never sustainable I don't believe. Over time, I would expect the motivation teachers receive from incentives would decrease over time.
- yummyfajitas 17y ago
  Even if it works only for years 1-5 of a teacher's career, it would still be useful. If we combine an incentive plan with a plan to keep most teachers in this window (i.e., get rid of teachers after year 6), it could be fantastically useful. Though I must admit, I don't really buy your thesis that incentives only work short term. If they did, you'd expect entrepreneurs to be unmotivated beyond the short term, for example.
  - gjm11 17y ago
    i.e., get rid of teachers after year 6: Is it your opinion that teachers learn nothing in the course of doing their job?
    - yummyfajitas 17y ago
      It is my opinion that teachers learn nothing useful after 2 years. One source (among many others): http://notebook.lausd.net/pls/ptl/docs/PAGE/CA_LAUSD/FLDR_ORGANIZATIONS/FLDR_PLCY_RES_DEV/PAR_DIVISION_MAIN/RESEARCH_PLANNING/PUBLICATIONS/REPORTS/PAU%20PAY%20%26%20PERFORM.PDF http://notebook.lausd.net/pls/ptl/docs/PAGE/CA_LAUSD/FLDR_OR... So I suppose that a more careful cost-benefit analysis needs to be made.
      - gjm11 17y ago
        Let's suppose that the results of that study are accurate and generalizable, so that (1) teachers with at most two years of experience are dramatically worse than ones with three or more, but that beyond that there's no advantage to having more. And let's suppose that although the study talks about "less than three years experience" and is written as if there's no such thing as a teacher with less than one year of experience, what they actually mean is "first two years", "next two years", etc. So. You are proposing to throw teachers out after six years of teaching. Then, assuming every teacher stays the full six years, 1/3 of all teachers will be in that low-experience category that teaches so much less effectively. At present, according to the study you cited, the figure is more like 1/5. It seems that your proposal will result in 65% more pupils being taught by teachers who do not do a good job. This is not the only reason why your suggestion seems to me unlikely to be a good one, but it seems a pretty compelling reason.
  - aik 17y ago
    Why would entrepreneurs lose their motivation? Entrepreneurs are working for themselves, not for some chunk of change someone else will give them if they perform as well as some random person wants them to. If we get rid of teachers after 6 years, what would that teacher do? How would this work exactly?

aik 17y ago

Exactly my thought. Hence the situation the US is in now - teachers don't get paid for performance, but school districts do and they force all kinds of behavior on teachers, namely teach how to pass THE-CURRENT-IMPORTANT-TEST.