Merit based pay for teachers

I've always believed that teachers, just like all other professionals, should have their performance evaluated every year and their pay should be based on performance. However, as has been mentioned, there is a large subjective element to this. Test scores alone are not a good indication of the teacher's effectiveness. Perhaps year over year change in test scores should play a part. Somebody (principal, assistant principle, etc.) needs to observe the teacher periodically. Input from their peers could also be included. By the way, I also think principals should be rated by the teachers.

(My mother and aunt both taught the deaf for 30 years.)

 

If I were a high school teacher and were paid on merit pay I would seek out the Physics and chemistry classes 5to teach at the best schools in the US where the students who are admitted are all the tops students.

The fact is that top students do not need much of a teacher. It takes the best teachers to motivate the students who are unmotivated and have poor genes.

My daughter took the Iowa standardized tests for ninth graders and her composite score was in the 99th percentile. We have noticed no difference in schools as we have lived in a number of states.

When I started in college I went to a small state school and then graduated from a big name university in CA. But the small college was better and I worked much harder too. The big name university was a picnic by comparison but they get the bucks.

 

Don't kid yourself. Often the best people in industry are fired because they are a threat to those over them.

Merit pay is a joke! Good people are good no matter what they are paid. Poor people will always be poor. Motivation and talent is intrinsic.

 

How do you determine who's good and who's poor?

 

The experts are in schools are always those whose children are failing. They are the complainers with all the answers.