4 ms·

Wow... do we have such an epically failed understanding of economics that "behavior incented by money increases" merits a headline? Seriously? Now whether the

• jseliger 17y ago
  Actually, the question of "What incentives motivate teachers to teach well?" is extremely debatable, and the real question underlying your "behavior incented by money increases" comment. At the moment, it's effectively impossible to fire teachers after two or three years, no matter how poorly they do: see, for example, http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/08/31/090831fa_fact_brill?currentPage=all http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/08/31/090831fa_fact_... .
  • Calamitous 17y ago
    I think see your point in the first sentence, in that money alone (once you've achieved a basic livelihood) is a questionable motivator of job quality. The article, however, is not necessarily talking about "teaching well," it was fundamentally about improving test scores. I was mostly taking issue with the headline's (and article's) apparent surprise that offering money for higher X caused X to increase. Not sure why an experiment was needed to establish this. Also, your rubber room article is horrifying, but I don't really see the relevance... except that the reward mechanism has been completely divorced from performance of any kind.