That would be a change in jobs altogether, requiring different education and experience. Superintendents aren't teachers. Further, your suggestion that advancement means leaving the classroom puts teaching in the category of entry level position.
Is that who you want teaching your child to read? 1st year teachers?
Show me any industry where you don't change jobs as you are promoted. If you want to do the exact same thing all of your life, of course you won't get promoted. You could be a soldier who starts as a private and retires as a general. The general is not doing the same job as the private, but they are both still soldiering. The teacher fresh out of the normal school and the "Dr. Jill" superintendent are both employed in the education industry with at least the same basic mission to educate children on reading, writing, arithmetic, and the 57 genders, but they are on either end of the career spectrum.
Also... your military analogy actually supports the current system of compensation. Rank and experience. In education, you move up a "rank" by taking grad classes, getting a Masters, etc. They're called Class Changes. But... still a teacher.
How would you do it then? How would you rate the performance of elementary art teachers vs middle school band teachers vs high school calculus teachers? What data would you use? Would the same system apply to those who teach disabled students?
I'll wait for your enlightened response, I'm sure laden with terms like "annual review" (principals struggle to find time to do this already), "performance goals", "test data" (many subjects have no viable test data), and so forth.
Good luck! This has been discussed a million times in educational circles, so I can't wait to hear your input.
Easy - evaluate the teachers based on their students' proficiency in the class. If the 10th grade English teacher has his/her students reading at the 8th grade level at the end of the year, the teacher should get his/her pay CUT.
Literally every other job has performance reviews. The McDonald's fry cook has performance reviews. The bagger at the grocery store has performance reviews. The greeter at Wal-Mart has performance reviews.
So I said this exactly one post prior and it was meant to be sarcasm. This buffoon actually said it and meant it.
FNA: by your criteria a teacher with an incoming 8th grade student reading at the 3rd grade level and leaving reading at the 7th grade level should be punished. Would you care to explain your logic on this?
Easy - evaluate the teachers based on their students' proficiency in the class. If the 10th grade English teacher has his/her students reading at the 8th grade level at the end of the year, the teacher should get his/her pay CUT.
Literally every other job has performance reviews. The McDonald's fry cook has performance reviews. The bagger at the grocery store has performance reviews. The greeter at Wal-Mart has performance reviews.
What if they started the year at the 5th grade level? And how many students matter? All of them? Is 90% good enough? What if all of them were reading above grade level to start the year? What tool are you using to measure that reading level? What if students don't try on the test, because it doesn't affect them directly - or worse, they tank purposely because they know it affects their teacher's pay?
What about art classes? What's the difference between 7th grade art skills and 8th grade art skills? And who is doing all of these performance reviews? Principals are busy with students much of the day, communicating with parents, engaging in the business of the school. How are they to do performance reviews? And when?
Shouldn't one wait until the END of the year to test students - if teachers are to be rated based on growth? Michigan tests in early April, a full 2 months before school ends. Should students' growth be prorated then?
Nebulous, vague terms like "performance standards" and "annual review" mean absolutely f'n nothing until you put details behind the terms. The problem, of course, is that the "products" in education are people, not objects.
Which is why the McDonald's manager can more easily give a performance rating to a fry cook than one can to a teacher. Fries don't have crappy homes, inconsistent support, motivation issues... or free will.
Try again.
Nice meltdown. Your entire argument is that student performance has very little to do with whether their teacher is good or not. If that's the case, then we should be paying teachers MINIMUM WAGE.
Easy - evaluate the teachers based on their students' proficiency in the class. If the 10th grade English teacher has his/her students reading at the 8th grade level at the end of the year, the teacher should get his/her pay CUT.
Literally every other job has performance reviews. The McDonald's fry cook has performance reviews. The bagger at the grocery store has performance reviews. The greeter at Wal-Mart has performance reviews.
So I said this exactly one post prior and it was meant to be sarcasm. This buffoon actually said it and meant it.
FNA: by your criteria a teacher with an incoming 8th grade student reading at the 3rd grade level and leaving reading at the 7th grade level should be punished. Would you care to explain your logic on this?
If that student's previous teachers had to teach him to read in order to get a pay increase, the student wouldn't get so far behind.
And a student shouldn't be advanced to the 8th grade if they read at the 3rd grade level. They should be held back.
What if they started the year at the 5th grade level? And how many students matter? All of them? Is 90% good enough? What if all of them were reading above grade level to start the year? What tool are you using to measure that reading level? What if students don't try on the test, because it doesn't affect them directly - or worse, they tank purposely because they know it affects their teacher's pay?
What about art classes? What's the difference between 7th grade art skills and 8th grade art skills? And who is doing all of these performance reviews? Principals are busy with students much of the day, communicating with parents, engaging in the business of the school. How are they to do performance reviews? And when?
Shouldn't one wait until the END of the year to test students - if teachers are to be rated based on growth? Michigan tests in early April, a full 2 months before school ends. Should students' growth be prorated then?
Nebulous, vague terms like "performance standards" and "annual review" mean absolutely f'n nothing until you put details behind the terms. The problem, of course, is that the "products" in education are people, not objects.
Which is why the McDonald's manager can more easily give a performance rating to a fry cook than one can to a teacher. Fries don't have crappy homes, inconsistent support, motivation issues... or free will.
Try again.
Nice meltdown. Your entire argument is that student performance has very little to do with whether their teacher is good or not. If that's the case, then we should be paying teachers MINIMUM WAGE.
So I said this exactly one post prior and it was meant to be sarcasm. This buffoon actually said it and meant it.
FNA: by your criteria a teacher with an incoming 8th grade student reading at the 3rd grade level and leaving reading at the 7th grade level should be punished. Would you care to explain your logic on this?
If that student's previous teachers had to teach him to read in order to get a pay increase, the student wouldn't get so far behind.
And a student shouldn't be advanced to the 8th grade if they read at the 3rd grade level. They should be held back.
What if that student moved her from a different country? Or a different district with different assessment measures? Or not data at all?
Or if the parents don't agree to holding a child back, which is something districts around here haven't done for a good 25+ years.
Kids arrive in class as a product of their previous experiences, their family lives, and their natural abilities. Teachers must teach them anyway. There is no fair, equitable system of evaluating teachers based on student performances. It's all been tried, and it's all flawed.
As one former educator put it... any attempt to evaluate teachers based on student performance is like measuring the height of a horse with rubber bands.
Put on your critical thinkers hat and really delve into what you're suggesting. It... just... doesn't... work.
Show me any industry where you don't change jobs as you are promoted. If you want to do the exact same thing all of your life, of course you won't get promoted. You could be a soldier who starts as a private and retires as a general. The general is not doing the same job as the private, but they are both still soldiering. The teacher fresh out of the normal school and the "Dr. Jill" superintendent are both employed in the education industry with at least the same basic mission to educate children on reading, writing, arithmetic, and the 57 genders, but they are on either end of the career spectrum.
Also... your military analogy actually supports the current system of compensation. Rank and experience. In education, you move up a "rank" by taking grad classes, getting a Masters, etc. They're called Class Changes. But... still a teacher.
Another similarity between teaching and the military is most don't last beyond 5 years.
So I said this exactly one post prior and it was meant to be sarcasm. This buffoon actually said it and meant it.
FNA: by your criteria a teacher with an incoming 8th grade student reading at the 3rd grade level and leaving reading at the 7th grade level should be punished. Would you care to explain your logic on this?
If that student's previous teachers had to teach him to read in order to get a pay increase, the student wouldn't get so far behind.
And a student shouldn't be advanced to the 8th grade if they read at the 3rd grade level. They should be held back.
"fake news alert".... you went crickets on us. I thought you had answers? C'mon, we're always looking to improve here. If you could address the latest retorts and "well, you're not really thinking about" responses, that'd be wicked awesome.
One thing to consider is that I've been teaching for 24 years and I make 70K. There are districts in Illinois where I would start at 70K. It depends on where you teach and for how long.
I'm not complaining- I went into it knowing I would never make a lot of money. I'm lucky enough to be in a school district where I absolutely love it.
If that student's previous teachers had to teach him to read in order to get a pay increase, the student wouldn't get so far behind.
And a student shouldn't be advanced to the 8th grade if they read at the 3rd grade level. They should be held back.
What if that student moved her from a different country? Or a different district with different assessment measures? Or not data at all?
Or if the parents don't agree to holding a child back, which is something districts around here haven't done for a good 25+ years.
Kids arrive in class as a product of their previous experiences, their family lives, and their natural abilities. Teachers must teach them anyway. There is no fair, equitable system of evaluating teachers based on student performances. It's all been tried, and it's all flawed.
As one former educator put it... any attempt to evaluate teachers based on student performance is like measuring the height of a horse with rubber bands.
Put on your critical thinkers hat and really delve into what you're suggesting. It... just... doesn't... work.
Sorry I can't always respond in minutes, I actually work more than 8 hours a day because I'm not a teacher.
I already answered your question accurately. Evaluate teachers based on student performance. If you want to claim that teacher performance has little result on student performance, then we should immediately start paying teachers minimum wage.
Maybe you wouldn't be so dense if your teachers had to pass performance reviews.
The whole “they only work 3/4 of the year” thing has often been misleading. My wife teaches closer to about 83% of the year. Even during that other 17%, they often have school related commitments.
I also work about 50-60 hours a week and my wife easily puts in 60+ and makes less than 50k a year. Meanwhile I make 109k. If I didn’t make that, my wife wouldn’t be able to be a teacher because it’s not enough money for our area. Most of the teachers in our area have spouses that are the breadwinner even though the teachers work harder and longer hours.
I think back in the day, the stereotype that teachers didn't make much money was true. My high school teachers drove beater cars. But not when I drop my son off at school, the teacher's parking lot has nicer cars than me and we make close to 300k combined. There are new Mercedes, Land Rovers, F150 trucks, Toyota Sequoias, Land Rovers, Rav 4 hybrids, BMWs, Porsche SUVs etc.
Any chance these teachers have spouses who work too? I mean, it's possible.
That is exactly what is going on a very high percentage of the time. We are closing in on a world where the only people who can afford to be teachers are people that don’t have to worry about money anyway.
Keep in mind they only work 3/4 of the year so that 65k is more like 87k. Average household income in the USA is more like 50k.
Anyways, this isn't intended to be a teacher-bashing thread. Personally I LOVE some of my teachers so I'm glad those ones are well paid.
Point is did you realize they were paid so highly?
I'm a teacher. Starting pay with a bachelor's degree for my district is $48k. You get to $60k after 16 years, or 13 years + masters or 10 years + doctorate.
It is decent pay for a very easy job. I wouldn't say I am paid highly, but also my quality of life is pretty comfortable, as I think it should be for a teacher.
But yes, we get a lot of time off, and that's rad.
If you get a lot of time off, you probably aren’t doing the job right.
I'm a teacher. Starting pay with a bachelor's degree for my district is $48k. You get to $60k after 16 years, or 13 years + masters or 10 years + doctorate.
It is decent pay for a very easy job. I wouldn't say I am paid highly, but also my quality of life is pretty comfortable, as I think it should be for a teacher.
But yes, we get a lot of time off, and that's rad.
If you get a lot of time off, you probably aren’t doing the job right.
Teachers get every random holiday off, summers off, they never have to work weekends. I'm sure a small % of teachers work 50 hour weeks, just like there are people in EVERY profession that work 50+ hour weeks.
But teaching is the only job where you can work 6 hours a day and never get fired. Teaching is the only job where you can take an entire summer off and never get fired.
Even bad teachers have 100% job security as long as they aren't committing crimes at work. Bad teachers get guaranteed raises too.
If you get a lot of time off, you probably aren’t doing the job right.
Teachers get every random holiday off, summers off, they never have to work weekends. I'm sure a small % of teachers work 50 hour weeks, just like there are people in EVERY profession that work 50+ hour weeks.
But teaching is the only job where you can work 6 hours a day and never get fired. Teaching is the only job where you can take an entire summer off and never get fired.
Even bad teachers have 100% job security as long as they aren't committing crimes at work. Bad teachers get guaranteed raises too.
This is partly true (depending on the culture set up by the principal) and true of many government jobs. People, including me, go into these job for security. However it doesnt mean we're highly paid and it's more difficult than it might seem. There's a reason why so many leave frustrated after a few years.
If you get a lot of time off, you probably aren’t doing the job right.
Teachers get every random holiday off, summers off, they never have to work weekends. I'm sure a small % of teachers work 50 hour weeks, just like there are people in EVERY profession that work 50+ hour weeks.
But teaching is the only job where you can work 6 hours a day and never get fired. Teaching is the only job where you can take an entire summer off and never get fired.
Even bad teachers have 100% job security as long as they aren't committing crimes at work. Bad teachers get guaranteed raises too.
Correction - they get those days off from actively teaching students. Most of what you posted is wildly misleading. When do you think teachers prep, write exams, grade papers, etc.? I’ll give you a hint - usually it’s on “all those random days off.”
I work in one of the busiest professions and even the teachers most think are lazy work almost as many hours as I do. The good teachers are working 60-80 hours, a lot of it behind the scenes, and they do it even though they know a bunch of keyboard warriors will assume otherwise.
I’ll also reiterate that I don’t know a single teacher that actually works a 40 hour week. Some are probably closer to 45-50 phoning it in; others probably do work closer to 10-12 (closer to 12 if they also coach, etc.) hours Monday-Friday and are using 3-4+hours on both Saturday and Sunday for prep and to catch up. And it’s only getting worse in many places as distractions in the classroom and administrative red tape both slows things down and adds more responsibilities.
I’ll also reiterate that I don’t know a single teacher that actually works a 40 hour week. Some are probably closer to 45-50 phoning it in; others probably do work closer to 10-12 (closer to 12 if they also coach, etc.) hours Monday-Friday and are using 3-4+hours on both Saturday and Sunday for prep and to catch up. And it’s only getting worse in many places as distractions in the classroom and administrative red tape both slows things down and adds more responsibilities.
You are just proving how little you know. They are getting paid extra to coach so you can't factor that in.
Students actually have less homework and less graded assignments now than 20-30 years ago.
Teachers don't have to grade assignments on holidays because their school day is only 7 hours INCLUDING LUNCH and they have 2-3 off periods EACH DAY where they can grade and prep.
What happens if you don't grade stuff in a timely fashion? Nothing. What happens if you aren't prepped? Nothing because there are no performance evaluations.