The Instigator
Pro (for)
1 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
4 Points

Should teachers be paid partly based on the performance based on their students?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/27/2012 Category: Education
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,551 times Debate No: 28681
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (2)




First Round is for acknowledgement of a clean debate and respect for both parties engaged.

If you want to take the side of Pro, please tell me... I can argue both sides if you choose.


Teachers should not be paid extra for the performance of students and here is why.

There are 2 types of Students in school, there is the "Quick Grasp Students" and then there are those who aren't them. Now the teachers don't know in advance who is who. Also, they don't pick the students in their class. Therefore, it is unfair to the teachers getting paid more by having better students in their class. Keeping in mind that the teachers don't write the curriculum. Say there are 2 teachers (A and B). Teacher A has the same teaching skills as Teacher B but the only difference is that teacher A has quicker analyzing and constructive students. Now by the end of the year, those constructive students of Teacher A have a class average of 90%. Teacher B who wasn't granted as many constructive students and the class average was 75%. These 2 teachers would have put in the same effort just to realize that Teacher A got more money on her paycheck. Harsh... is it not?
Debate Round No. 1


Thank you for the acknowledgement of a clean debate and respect for both parties engaged. *sarcasm*

Lets get into specifics shall we....

You are right when it comes different types of student, but I have a solution to this problem.

Now consider this. You have the same exact scenario put in front of you... teacher A and teacher B... they teach the same, yet they have different students with different averages and learning capabilities. Now i am going to add in a variable that you didn't factor into the equation and that is dedication... the determination of the teacher wanting his/her students to understand their material.

Teacher A shows more dedication compared to teacher B.
I have assumed they have equal skills.
Now you have student A, student B, student C, student D and student E.

Teacher A is with student A / C and
Teacher B is with Student B / D / E

Student A's average is say a 80 coming into the class and Student B's average is a 75...
while student C and D both have 95's

Over the year, we track the students progress...

Teacher A
student A 80 --> 85
student B 75 --> 95

Teacher B
student C 95 --> 95
student D 95 --> 85
student E 80 --> 84

Let's say the base pay for the teacher would be 75,000 dollars...

Teacher A reached out to his/her students in addition to them coming to their teacher...
That dedication resulted in increase in grades within their students...
a significant improvement over last year's average. And it is that which deserves higher pay.
Take the average increase in the students performance and put that into a formula to make that your
extra pay... hypothetically, lets just say that for every average point increase was $1000
in this case, the average increase was 10... an extra $10000 that the teacher earned by helping their
students in addition to teaching them.

Teacher B didn't put that much effort into helping his/her kids...
So there were a few that dropped in average and a few that increased.
in this case, the average drop was -2 points... now anything negative would not result in a pay decrease
the improvement would just be there for a bonus.

So the difference is harsh (85k vs. 75k) but the dedication and the will to make your students better is part of being a teacher. Not just spitting out information and hoping they repeat it back to you.

For higher placement classes and lower placement classes, the improvement to cash ratio will be different so that the teachers will get a fair increase in their performance payments. I guess to be specific, the higher placement class will give bonuses for just maintaining the average, since some kids bump up to higher levels or excelled there from the beginning. And the lower placement classes will have a different formula, but would be as fair as possible so the ones in higher placement classes can earn as much as the lower place classes

And that is where the difference lies...

However, if a teacher does really poorly with his students... like a class average improvement of -5 to -10 points... then the teacher must be considered for further training or termination.... but teacher's tenure is another subject to debate about... please don't go to tenure that is for a later debate!

Thank you for participating in this debate... i'm sorry if the sarcasm was a bit much :)



I am so sorry for my arrogance, this was my first post on a debate and I didn't know how it worked so I just started talking. Also I didn't read your first comment, I apologize.

I take in to consideration about this other factor you brought into the picture but then you must realize that there are plenty of other factors that could play into this. Allow me to explain.

Say Teacher A has a class of 15 students (sounds reasonable). Remember the teacher to student ratio is 1:15 and assuming that there are 5 smarter independent kids, this leaves 10 kids that didn't understand the teachers lessons.

Now let's move to teacher b who has 12 smart independent students. This would leave only 3 students that have problems and they just so happen to be more easily dealt with. One thing to keep in mind is that no students are exactly alike and not all of them are going to be winners, we must accept this. There are more circumstances in the educational system where it is out of the power of the one classroom teacher to bring up the marks of their students. Sometimes one teacher gets way more actively independent 90% students which only leads to the other teachers getting less of these students. This is a gamble that the school board isn't willing to make. In these certain circumstances, the teacher with a lower percentage of over achieving students would have to try way harder than usual just to come close to such an average of the other class, and due to the lazy students bringing the course median down, Teacher A's class would have a higher class median than that of the grade leading Teacher A to getting a bonus on her paycheck without putting much effort in at all. Oh and just in case you are wondering, the board doesn't record how hard a teacher works into educating a student. All that matters is the average at the end.
Debate Round No. 2


No Ill feelings :)

OK, well to handle that problem... those that have a high average... lets consider this a 90 or above... as I mentioned in an earlier post... those independent kids are already a benefactor to the teacher... all they have to do is maintain their grades, and the teacher would still get a bonus from them... remember what i said about the upper placement classes, if good students maintain goo grades, then the teacher will be paid like a teacher that does well in a lower placement class.

So if we take those concepts to your example and alter it a bit...

class size is 15...
teacher a has a student ratio of 12-3... 12 good students, 3 average
teacher b has a student ratio of 3-12... 3 good, 12 average

now what can be done here is to exempt the evaluation of performance of the good student, giving the teachers a small bonus for maintaining their grades.

for the 3 students in teacher A's class, that person must only take care of 3 people,
while teacher B has to take care of 12 people.

It may seem like a balance problem...

seeing as teacher a has to less work, but there is less pressure from that safety from not worrying about those kids who excel

However, teacher B has more room and a better opportunity to make a better bonus than A because of the number of children that aren't so independent

one teacher has a safer more consistent while teacher b has an opportunity to make more than A depending how much the teacher wants to work with the children.

Or, if you think that is not a good idea, I am confident that most school today have the technology to find out each of the children's grade and put the teachers in a situation that the number of excelling students is equal to the number of students that aren't really excelling... if there is an odd ratio... 8-7, then the next year could be 7-8... They can do that... it really isn't that hard to apply the system of equaling the ratio of smart and not so smart kids in the same class.

Then you look at the school in terms off the overall ratio... say there are 50 smart kids and 150 average kids....
then the ratio for every teacher would be the same 1:4 !

and to go even further... say you have regular classes and AP classes....
there are 50 smart kids, 150 average...

40 smart kids and 40 average kids are in AP classes, making the ratio for those teachers 1:1
10 smart kids and 110 average kids in regular classes, making the ration for those teachers 1:11

and as i clarify... the bonus is not about the median... it is about each child's individual improvement based on the previous year which determines the teacher's bonus.... i am sorry if you thought otherwise.

"Oh and just in case you are wondering, the board doesn't record how hard a teacher works into educating a student. All that matters is the average at the end." this is irrelevant because this also depends solely on the averages of the children.



Some students don't need the teachers help to maintain high marks. These responsible kids would come find their own way without any drastic lesson changes from the teacher. One other thing you should know is that this argument is based on all teachers from every grade all around the world so we must argue from such a perspective.

Fact: There are more schools in the world (ranging from kindergarten - University) that don't have higher or lower level classes for students, it's all one big mix with class size ranging from 10 - 40. University being 30 - 600+

The point you argued was that it should be independent and not a class median is rather unstable. With no one reporting of the teachers devotion, on an independent level, some of the average students can have marks drastically increase and some drastically decrease due to the teacher to student ratio. This is even worse if this was a teacher with a lower number of smart students. Having a teacher getting paid for their devotion may sound like a good idea at first, but without monitoring their devotion and just taking the 50-50 chance that this teacher isn't put up with a poor class isn't worth the idea. Unless you are suggesting some way to track their devotion without the use of checking marks after the term. Checking marks after the term is also flawed, when some parents see their child's mark decreasing, they give them a tutor or send them to an educational program (but not always). These ducational assistance programs are makingmillions just to fill in the void of the teachers. That means there are a ton of students out there who are doing better in class without the teacher (KEEP THIS IN MIND). With factors like this and no one monitoring teacher devotion. Paying teachers extra based on no out side knowledge is OBVIOUSLY a risk that the boards aren't willing to pay. If you are saying that with devotion, anything is possible. You are sadly mistaken. I'm aware of some teacher's that's sole purpose of being a teacher is to be 1000% devoted to teaching student's in her class but even despite all that, the class average 76% with no one getting higher than 95%. Shouldn't she get paid for her devotion even though the class average was low. On the other hand, this other teacher is all about second chances, unlike the first teacher. Whenever you get a bad mark, you have the option of a retest or to not include that evaluation. Keeping this in mind, the second teacher had a class average of 88% without ANY devotion what so ever. Congratulations teacher 2, take 2 years off and don't worry. We'll just combine your class with teacher 1, according to the marks we got back, she needs to work harder.

- Omar816
Debate Round No. 3


Once again, you are still mistaken that this is nt the class average we are talking about! is this overall improvement of the individual student!

NOT THE CLASS AVERAGE! (excuse the caps)

If student a IMPROVES from the year before... then the teacher gets a formulated bonus.

If student a REGRESSES from the year before... then the teacher's salary has a negative effect, but can't go lower than the BASE salary...
The bonus is calulated on formulas based on the IMPROVENENT of EACH child.

The general trend of improvment within the class is IRRELEVANT hence CLASS AVERGAGE IS IRRELEVANT.

Also, this is MIDDLE/HIGH School we are talking about... PUBLIC SCHOOLS... NOT UNIVERISTIES!
(although I should have made this evidently clear to which that i am sorry)

External tutoring is also IRRELEVANT because the student has to reach themselves if they really need the help... I am sure teachers and parents can network to some tutors if the child needs them... sending them to someone else can be helpful! It only benefits the teachers more so anyways.

Extra Credit or rertakes should not be administered unless approved by the board... I really don't believe in extra credit or retakes.
Splits between higher and lower classes is just an odd case scenario as I did realize that most classes are put together. Please trust me on this... most if not all school should and have the data necessary to carry out these provisions, formulas and create a more maticulous and efficient system that I briefly laid out here.

Thanks for this debate I enjoyed it!



Learning Centers like Sylvan are multi-million dollar companies that tutor people in school and currently, I think you highly over estimate the number of dedicated teachers in the world.

Sylvan is what parents take their kids to when they feel their child needs a boost in their worrking habits and it is this multi- million dollar company that works very hard to make their clients smarter.

I'm sure you know now that this means that students everywhere are getting smarter without the help of teachers.

Now say that there is a really popular Sylvan in town and alot of students from one school attend (say 50). If a fraction of those 50 were in the same class. This would mean more students are working harder leaving the teacher to not have to work as hard but ..

... as you said the marks get higher from one grade to another but the teachers would have nothing to do with it. The main priority for parents regarding a childs education is to make sure they obtain success and that is when tutoring was invented.

Its because of tutoring that lazy children have become smarter and more independant which lead to their marks increasing.

Also, what if a student is tired of failing and next year, he tries much harder than before and gets 40% higher than normal.

This means its the teachers luck of having that student in his/her class and they deserve a bonus?
A teachers fate should not rely on her students intentions or luck.
Tutoring also plays a huge role in grade increase and teachers should not benefit from their students tutoring benefits.
Anyone would agree that its wrong to do so.

Good debate. Thanks ~
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by morgan2252 5 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Both sides had similar conduct. Pro had many typoes and forgot to capitalize a lot of words. Both sides had convincing argments, but con was a bit more convincing. No sides had sources.
Vote Placed by The_Master_Riddler 5 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: for breaking the rules