cincybearcat wrote:scb wrote:I know you also said some other stuff about "good" teachers (which is still undefined) getting paid more, but it's hard to get past all the negativity about teachers, which I think it much more prevalent than any positivity about, appreciation for, or understanding of them.
I understand and actually agree with a lot of what you say. It disturbs me though that you don't seem to think there is a way to measure a good teacher vs a poor teacher. It's certainly not as easy as measuring the performance of a salesman as there are far more variables and no 1 measure that can quantify the totality of a teacher's ability/job performance. But I certainly think it can and should be done. It is better to reward those teachers that perform at a high level (#1 It keeps them teaching #2 It incentives others to become teachers #3 It's a wake up call to anyone currently riding the gravy train) rather than reward someone just for showing up for so long.
I'm sure there's a way to evaulate teachers - but no one who has been talking about all the shitty teachers has been able to really tell me what it is, though they judge. I don't think it should be based on students' grades though, nor do I think all the various experiences of teachers should be measured with the same measuring stick. If I were tasked with coming up with an evaluation system for teachers, I would ask the teachers. (Isn't that part of the problem with our education system - that we have a top-down instead of bottom-up approach?) And I wouldn't have the teachers at a wealthy school creating a system for teachers at a poor school, or regular ed teachers creating a system for special ed teachers, etc. But I would argue that evaluation systems are already in place - and they evaluate a lot more than just attendance.