Duh. I came across this article, which does a nice job of reporting the facts and providing balance to the story (which I really appreciate, because many times the stories are sensationalized beyond belief).
So why can't teachers get paid according to how good they are? Because it's hard to measure how good they are? Because it's not fair to all the ones who suck? I'm an engineer... I get paid according to how good I am (more or less, of course there's all kinds of politics and stuff that go with it, but it's much better than how teachers are rewarded right now). And the ones who suck at it probably have talents in other areas, which hopefully they go and develop.
I love the fact (sarcasm) that people immediate start jumping to using test scores to measure how good a teacher is. The problem with that is the Heisenberg uncertainty principle kicks in (recall from science class that this says that you can't directly measure anything because the process of measuring it changes it) and the law of unintended consequences kick in. One of my biggest pet peeves is being so focused on your measures you lose sight of your goals. People are rewarded by test scores, so now all efforts go towards improving tests scores (measures) instead of preparing kids to thrive in the real world (goal). I don't fault the teachers; I fault the system.
The real measure, albeit a little fuzzy, is how well a student grows up and makes it in the real world. I'd love to start a school in which we at least make an attempt to measure teachers in that way. The school would require a totally different business model, but why not give it a shot. One of my ideas in the past was to somehow make it like a church collection... you pass the basket and people pay what they feel like it was worth. Of course this probably doesn't work until MBA school, but maybe you take this concept further and you run the school off donations from alumni. It's a bit idealistic, but why can't we at least start working towards it?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
If you wait until the student grows up, which of the 30 some teachers that impacted their life gets "credit" or "blame" (depending on how they chose to live their lives? And really, parents need to have the largest "teaching" role to a child, so it's not the academic ones anyway.
Do teachers need to be paid more? Well. Most teachers I know, with the same education (2 related degrees) and experience (4 years) as me, get paid more than me, get 3 months off in summer, plus Christmas break and Spring break, and personal paid time off. I get 12 paid holidays and get 14 personal days (and this job gives a lot more than others starting out). My feeling? They're actually coming out ahead and apparently don't realize it. Plus they can get summer jobs I can't get (some companies I've worked for do not permit second jobs).
Besides. what about the old saying "those who can - DO; those who can't - TEACH".
Ooh, I'd like to see Lisa's rebuttal on this one...if you want to compare teachers with people who hold 9-5 type of jobs...
...take into account that teachers will work well over 40 hours a week when grading papers and planning lessons are taken into account. Factor in training they go for over the summer and they're really not coming out ahead at all. Factor in that they're expected to turn out perfect students but have to deal with parents who a) refuse to do things like discipline their children, b) threaten the teacher when the teacher tries to discipline the kid and maintain order in the classroom, and c) tell the kids that they don't have to listen to the teacher, and no, they don't get paid nearly enough.
That's like saying anyone in a customer service type job (law enforcement, sales, etc) doesn't get paid enough for dealing with the masses. Yet that's known going into those professions. Education Students know they deal with good and rotten kids. and their parents.
9-5ers rarely (Ok, I have it now b/c we're still slow, but CERTAINLY didn't at Givaudan) work just 9-5. We worked 7-7, often, then would leave at 7 only to go home and do hours of paperwork. Business trips taking a red eye flight? Still at work by 9 for a 10 hour day. My point being very few professional jobs have it where the good employees get by on the bare minimum - we don't have papers to grade but we do have other paperwork/emails/phone calls to deal with. That's all part of being salaried and not hourly.
We, too, have to get additional yearly training (if I want to maintain certification I need to go to several classes, attend trade shows - which ALWAYS include a weekend, and take exams several times a year) - that is not unique to teachers.
Just gotta keep in mind that teachers are paid for 3/4 a year of "work" - therefor their salaries should be 75% of another professionals - and like I said, I knew a few in OH and KY that made what I made, yet according to this country's "rich/mid class/poor" standards, I was def in the middle class earning. Everyone, including them, put forth extra efforts. But the crappy ones on both "sides"? They don't put for the effort. We may get paid the same as our lazy colleagues, but we typically have better job security.
Oh. And one thing teachers have we don't have? They pay into their own retirement funds. They do NOT pay social security. Think about that. All the money we (non-public) employees are throwing away to social security? They are saving for their own retirement in a PERS account. Something we have to put aside separate from SS.
I think it's because teachers are unionized. Union pretty much means that you are paid according to your seniority rather than performance.
Post a Comment