Performance - Related Pay???

Pwpane

I assume you've read the study you're recommending.

So having informed yourself, what do you think? What constitutes an underperforming teacher and how can that be determined?

You want our opinions. Is it really too much to ask for yours?

marienbad

Pwpane wrote: »

I assume you've read the study you're recommending.

So having informed yourself, what do you think? What constitutes an underperforming teacher and how can that be determined?

You want our opinions. Is it really too much to ask for yours?

Not one of you has expressed an opinion yet ! will you answer my question above ?

amacca

marienbad wrote: »

So do you agree with the principle of performance related pay under any circumstances ?

I'd agree with it under the following circumstances

1) It is not based on exam results in any fashion --way way too many variables to account for to make it fair Imo

2) It does not lead to dramatic increases in working time for management or teachers or indeed turn into a tick the box time wasting paper generation exercise in the usual bul****tery clipboard middle management types have wet dreams and endless pointless meetings about or it does not lead to even more mandatory cover your ass paperwork…...

3) It is actually linked to meaningful pay rises, a shorter pay scale , proper opportunities for actual promotion within the profession to more than just principal or deputy principal positions with reductions in contact hours where necessary(there are many many management type jobs within schools now that the department is trying to get done for free - in many cases successfully by management putting pressure on NQTs + others - these jobs include computer maintenance, lab technician type roles, extra sports outside of school time etc etc, I could go on, in real terms these add many months to a lot of teachers working time and no recognition is given for it - in fact just abuse in some cases)

4) It takes account of the fact that it is next to impossible to actually get rid of borderline criminal if not actually criminal thuggish elements within schools without going to the ends of the earth for many reasons including management not having spines (although to what extent you can have a spine given the way legislation has you tied up in knots is questionable - its the same as teaching really, you are in charge without really being in charge- you have to be good at giving off the illusion of authority) but also a childs right to education without any proper means of enforcing a responsibility on them not to be disruptive if they decide not to co-operate at least not for an unacceptably long period of time if its the majorities right to education were concerned about here…….just as you say everyone knows the "bad teacher"……I'd counter with everyone knows the "bad student" and knows they are just as hard to get rid of in most cases + there are a hell of a lot more of them imo……I'm not talking normal messing here……I'm talking continuous disruption, aggressive confrontational behaviour or even more insidious continuous low level disruption

5) Class sizes and resourcing issues addressed and proper teacher representation on whatever committees are deciding some of the frankly ludicrous project/practical work being set (sometimes i wonder if total morons are coming up with these - if they were even made try and do the projects themselves never mind get a class of 30 plus students through it with little or no relevant resources)

6) Prevention of the teaching council becoming just another stop on some career flunkies route to a ministers pet board position - I'm sick of these organisations being nothing more than receptacles for cronies of the powers that be with a few token academics and a couple of teachers to legitimise it - If its not already that then you can bet it soon will be.


Basically work on providing a proper environment for a teacher to work in or a proper framework put in place to achieve that and then work on the performance management side of it…or work on both side by side but I wouldn't be in favour of any performance management without these issues being addressed and not just in a token fashion either + I'd like to actually see what exact criteria you would propose to assess a teachers performance and if they would take account properly of the above

Chilli Con Kearney

@ marienbad

**gasps for deep breath, while waving hand like a lunatic** "Teacher, teacher, I'm still confused...what did you say, x, y and z were? The characteristics in bad teachers? You've labelled them but I'm still confused. Can you give me some examples?"

Pwpane

marienbad wrote: »

Not one of you has expressed an opinion yet ! will you answer my question above ?

You justified the 'need' for performance-related pay for teachers by claiming that it would deal with underperforming teachers.

But you won't say what an underperforming teacher is.

Or how an underperforming teacher would be identified.

In the absence of your own opinion, you put forward a recent study that states categorically that " A key problem is that current measures for
evaluating teachers are not often linked to their capacity to teach.

You now ask if we would agree with performance-related pay under any circumstances!

If underperformance cannot be identified how can it be measured in order to relate pay to it?

Pwpane

Chilli Con Kearney wrote: »

@ marienbad

**gasps for deep breath, while waving hand like a lunatic** "Teacher, teacher, I'm still confused...what did you say, x, y and z were? The characteristics in bad teachers? You've labelled them but I'm still confused. Can you give me some examples?"

He did? I must have been at the toilet - can I have your notes?

marienbad

Pwpane wrote: »

You justified the 'need' for performance-related pay for teachers by claiming that it would deal with underperforming teachers.

But you won't say what an underperforming teacher is.

Or how an underperforming teacher would be identified.

In the absence of your own opinion, you put forward a recent study that states categorically that " A key problem is that current measures for
evaluating teachers are not often linked to their capacity to teach.

You now ask if we would agree with performance-related pay under any circumstances!

If underperformance cannot be identified how can it be measured in order to relate pay to it?

That is just one study at random- there are loads of them . Do you agree with the principle or not ?

marienbad

Chilli Con Kearney wrote: »

@ marienbad

**gasps for deep breath, while waving hand like a lunatic** "Teacher, teacher, I'm still confused...what did you say, x, y and z were? The characteristics in bad teachers? You've labelled them but I'm still confused. Can you give me some examples?"

Do you know what makes a good teacher ?

Chilli Con Kearney

@marienbad

"I can guess what makes good teacher, but you were telling me about bad teachers. What are examples of x, y and z that make bad teachers?" This homework could be v hard without some examples to help me.

marienbad

Chilli Con Kearney wrote: »

@marienbad

"I can guess what makes good teacher, but you were telling me about bad teachers. What are examples of x, y and z that make bad teachers?" This homework could be v hard without some examples to help me.

if you can guess what makes a good teacher then you can do the same for a bad teacher.

Do you agree with the principle of performance related pay- yes or no ?

Pwpane

marienbad wrote: »

That is just one study at random- there are loads of them . Do you agree with the principle or not ?

Deal with my point. Stop moving the goalposts.

Explain what is meant by an underperforming teacher, and give indicators of how it can be measured.

Then we can move on to issues such as whether pay would be an effective means of influencing a teacher's 'performance', if so whether it's clear what this influence would be, should 'performance' include other tasks besides actual teaching, would it be cost effective, could there be more effective means of influencing teacher 'performance', is it quantity of work or quality of work, what exactly is it you're trying to get at anyway - increased student outcomes or increased teacher inputs...

Put down your markers till we see what we're dealing with.

seavill

Talk about going around in circles - can people not just answer questions put to them without redirecting everything and avoiding questions.

Marienbad - yes I agree with the principle of performance related pay however I pose to you the question which you keep avoiding (Why I have no idea) in your opinion how do you classify an under performing teacher and what do you suggest is the best way of measuring this?

I would appreciate if you would just answer the question this time rather than posing another question, I had the manners to answer your question now can you answer mine, thanks

Chilli Con Kearney

I think performance related pay is great, but how will we judge the concept you are proposing?

marienbad

seavill wrote: »

Talk about going around in circles - can people not just answer questions put to them without redirecting everything and avoiding questions.

Marienbad - yes I agree with the principle of performance related pay however I pose to you the question which you keep avoiding (Why I have no idea) in your opinion how do you classify an under performing teacher and what do you suggest is the best way of measuring this?

I would appreciate if you would just answer the question this time rather than posing another question, I had the manners to answer your question now can you answer mine, thanks

I am not avoiding anything -I have already answered it and posted a link , the most basic search will yield even more results .

You want an answer in a chat forum on what is a complex subject . If you accept the principle and the consequences , that the next step is to agree a methodology .

why do people think the teaching profession is not susceptible to measurement ?

seavill

marienbad wrote: »

I am not avoiding anything -I have already answered it and posted a link , the most basic search will yield even more results .

You want an answer in a chat forum on what is a complex subject . If you accept the principle and the consequences , that the next step is to agree a methodology .

why do people think the teaching profession is not susceptible to measurement ?

Can you link me or direct me to where you explained what you thought an under performing teacher was, that was the question, you linked a study you didn't say what you thought an underperforming teacher was?

Can you eitehr link me to where you answered this question or answer the question, that is what I asked you.

I would also appreciate that you don't put words in my mouth I agreed with the idea in principle where did I say I accept the consequences (what are the consequences you mention?)

Where did I say the teaching profession is not susceptible to measurement?

marienbad

seavill wrote: »

Can you link me or direct me to where you explained what you thought an under performing teacher was, that was the question, you linked a study you didn't say what you thought an underperforming teacher was?

Can you eitehr link me to where you answered this question or answer the question, that is what I asked you.

I would also appreciate that you don't put words in my mouth I agreed with the idea in principle where did I say I accept the consequences (what are the consequences you mention?)

Where did I say the teaching profession is not susceptible to measurement?

Look I am not going to educate you on what is a discipline all in itself .If you want to know more there is plenty of material available in a most cursory search online .

If you agree the teaching profession is susceptible to measurement than we are in agreement . But there is little point in agreeing with the principle if you don't accept the consequences.

The ultimate consequences are that better teachers would be better rewarded and lesser performing teachers would be less rewarded , even leading to dismissal if necessary .

seavill

marienbad wrote: »

Look I am not going to educate you on what is a discipline all in itself .If you want to know more there is plenty of material available in a most cursory search online .

If you agree the teaching profession is susceptible to measurement than we are in agreement . But there is little point in agreeing with the principle if you don't accept the consequences.

The ultimate consequences are that better teachers would be better rewarded and lesser performing teachers would be less rewarded , even leading to dismissal if necessary .

I'm not looking for you to educate me on anything I simply asked what was YOUR opinion on what an under performing teacher is.

I asked you to link back to your earlier explanation which you did not do so I presume I was correct in thinking that you didn't actually answer the question.

If you won't answer the question will you explain why you won't answer the question, you want to enter a discussion here but only on your terms, you want people to answer your questions (which I respectfully did) yet you won't answer a simple question I posed to you.

I will try one last time, what is YOUR opinion of what an under performing teacher is, I don't want any link to strategies of how to measure it, you have already given that, I am simply asking you one question.

Also in the previous post you put words into my mouth, I referred to these but you again ignore that part, I think one part of teacher performance that needs analyzing is the ability to enter a meaningful debate and the ability to answer questions that are posed properly. I know one person that would fall down on these aspects, no pay rise there (I jest). I don't konw if you are a teacher or not but I will say you would make a fine politician with your ability to avoid answering questions.

marienbad

seavill wrote: »

I'm not looking for you to educate me on anything I simply asked what was YOUR opinion on what an under performing teacher is.

I asked you to link back to your earlier explanation which you did not do so I presume I was correct in thinking that you didn't actually answer the question.

If you won't answer the question will you explain why you won't answer the question, you want to enter a discussion here but only on your terms, you want people to answer your questions (which I respectfully did) yet you won't answer a simple question I posed to you.

I will try one last time, what is YOUR opinion of what an under performing teacher is, I don't want any link to strategies of how to measure it, you have already given that, I am simply asking you one question.

Also in the previous post you put words into my mouth, I referred to these but you again ignore that part, I think one part of teacher performance that needs analyzing is the ability to enter a meaningful debate and the ability to answer questions that are posed properly. I know one person that would fall down on these aspects, no pay rise there (I jest). I don't konw if you are a teacher or not but I will say you would make a fine politician with your ability to avoid answering questions.

It makes no difference what my opinion on an under performing teacher is, and even if it did it is not possible to encapsulate it on a post in an internet forum .

Why does everyone want complex subjects boiled down to easyfit soundbites ?

I am simply making the argument that that Performance related methodologies are applicable to the teaching profession . And if that principle is accepted then consequences follow on from it. Otherwise it is a waste of time .

Pwpane

marienbad wrote: »

Look I am not going to educate you on what is a discipline all in itself .If you want to know more there is plenty of material available in a most cursory search online .

If you agree the teaching profession is susceptible to measurement than we are in agreement . But there is little point in agreeing with the principle if you don't accept the consequences.

The ultimate consequences are that better teachers would be better rewarded and lesser performing teachers would be less rewarded , even leading to dismissal if necessary .

It appears that you don't know.

You figure that someone somewhere must have it sorted but you really don't know the ins and outs of it all.

It appears that you believe, without evidence, that teachers' pay should be performance related because you want it to be so.

Have you, perhaps, a revenge motivation here? You think that teachers don't work hard enough, that their pay is too high compared to the job content, that surely they could fit more into their short working hours?

If not, let me pose you one more question: what particular advantage(s) do you see to performance-related pay for teachers? What advantage to the students, to the management, to the overall system?

seavill

marienbad wrote: »

It makes no difference what my opinion on an under performing teacher is, and even if it did it is not possible to encapsulate it on a post in an internet forum .

Why does everyone want complex subjects boiled down to easyfit soundbites ?

I am simply making the argument that that Performance related methodologies are applicable to the teaching profession . And if that principle is accepted then consequences follow on from it. Otherwise it is a waste of time .

Look its like this, you posed similar questions to people for example "how do you assess your colleagues" in post number 51 on this thread. Similarly difficult to encapsulate in a post here on an internet forum, as you are claiming it is for you to answer a simple question.

Going back on previous threads you have a particular issue with teacher performance, on threads going back 2 years that were not related but you still persist with your points, and in one post I believe you indicate why you are so passionate about it.

I will leave it there with you as we are going no where, you want simple yes no answers to questions that are complex, yet you are not willing to answer the most simple of things, just passing them off as too complex to answer. We are going no where and this thread has gone on for an extra 2 or 3 pages going around in circles.

I will finish with clarifying that I think performance management is important, however how that can be assessed and linked back to pay I'm not so sure at this current moment in time. I think that outsiders don't fully understand the complexities of the situation, however obviously it can't be a closed shop. I think you would struggle to find many people that wouldn't be delighted to get rid of that one waster that we all know in any walk of life. I don't think you would see many of us standing outside the gates in protest of them being removed, however its not a simple issue. Currently the system is not set up to help people. It is a sink or swim system with little or no management. Principals manage the school but don't manage their staff. I'm not criticising principals here, they don't have time or expertise to do this, I believe, at this point in time in the system we have.

marienbad

Pwpane wrote: »

It appears that you don't know.

You figure that someone somewhere must have it sorted but you really don't know the ins and outs of it all.

It appears that you believe, without evidence, that teachers' pay should be performance related because you want it to be so.

Have you, perhaps, a revenge motivation here? You think that teachers don't work hard enough, that their pay is too high compared to the job content, that surely they could fit more into their short working hours?

If not, let me pose you one more question: what particular advantage(s) do you see to performance-related pay for teachers? What advantage to the students, to the management, to the overall system?

You appear to think not knowing is a problem - it isn't , if this is the best you have to offer as a rebuttal to performance related measurements , then good luck to you.

And by the way less of the personalised stuff , it adds nothing to the conversation .

evolving_doors

marienbad wrote: »

It makes no difference what my opinion on an under performing teacher is, and even if it did it is not possible to encapsulate it on a post in an internet forum .

Why does everyone want complex subjects boiled down to easyfit soundbites ?

I am simply making the argument that that Performance related methodologies are applicable to the teaching profession . And if that principle is accepted then consequences follow on from it. Otherwise it is a waste of time .

Oh good, this is moving on a bit, although that isn't really an argument in the making, just what you would call an 'easyfit soundbite'... i.e. 'performance related methodologies'. Could you maybe outline how this would work in order to weed out the 'bad teachers'...

or dare i suggest it...

Give the good ones a pay rise (now there's a horrible thought for halloween).

marienbad

Armelodie wrote: »

Oh good, this is moving on a bit, although that isn't really an argument in the making, just what you would call an 'easyfit soundbite'... i.e. 'performance related methodologies'. Could you maybe outline how this would work in order to weed out the 'bad teachers'...

or dare i suggest it...

Give the good ones a pay rise (now there's a horrible thought for halloween).

It is a given that the good ones would get pay rises , that is one of the principles of performance related remuneration

Afroshack

marienbad wrote: »

It is a given that the good ones would get pay rises , that is one of the principles of performance related remuneration

So what is your criteria for seperating the 'good' from the 'bad?' This really must be the 10th time you've been asked this question marienbad. If you were a teacher your classroom would be utter chaos by now!

kippy

spurious wrote: »

You cannot apply business principles to education.
Wait, no, you can try, but it is a recipe for disaster.

Well thats just a daft thing to say. Of course you can apply certain business principles to certain areas of education.
Teachers currently get paid money to work. Surely this business principle needs to be applied to education? As does attracting and retaining staff, as does up skilling staff. Lots of business principles are applied to education.

amacca

marienbad wrote: »

Why does everyone want complex subjects boiled down to easyfit soundbites ?

pot kettle black

marienbad

Afroshack wrote: »

So what is your criteria for seperating the 'good' from the 'bad?' This really must be the 10th time you've been asked this question marienbad. If you were a teacher your classroom would be utter chaos by now!

And for the 10th time I refer you to the copious literature on the subject , stop looking for simple answers to complex things

marienbad

amacca wrote: »

pot kettle black

Not so, I am just advocating a principle - nothing more or less .

Chilli Con Kearney

Chilli Con Kearney wrote: »

I think performance related pay is great, but how will we judge the concept you are proposing?

You still haven't answered my question. If you can lay out some criteria which YOU think are relevant / important here that'd be most useful.

Otherwise, you're theory sounds like this:

Your boss: Hi marienbad, as your boss, we are now evaluating your work performance. We aren't telling you how. The best will be kept on. The worst will be shown the door.

Marienbad: em, but how will I know if I'm bad or good?

Your boss: I can't actually believe you are asking such a silly question. If you're bad, you'll be doing the opposite of the good ones. Sure everyone knows what a good [insert job here] does,duh. And if you know what a good [insert job here] does, you can figure out what a bad one does. If all else fails, just Google 'performance evaluation'. Have you an issue with that?

Marienbad: well...

Your boss: so you're against performance evaluation?

Marienbad: no...

Your boss: good. All sorted so. We will start evaluating right away.

amacca

marienbad wrote: »

Not so, I am just advocating a principle - nothing more or less .

Id disagree there….I'd say less, much much less………….perhaps more in your head.