In the current system, teacher performance is based on state and federal based outcomes reflective by standardized test. This is not an accurate measurement of teacher performance. Teacher performance needs to be assessed by a base line criteria established at the beginning of the year against end of the year measurements. Many classrooms are comprised of student from different socio-economic and ethnic backgrounds. It has been proven that students from lower income brackets have lower rates of achievement than those from more affluent means. Some classrooms consist of ELL and IEP student. Scores for a particular classroom comprised of these students do not reflected well on standardized test. Teacher can’t be held responsible for the backgrounds that student have when they arrive in their room. They should only prove that a child has progressed substantially under their instruction Proven advancements of students should correlate to teacher pay
Lack of interest is due to the fact most teachers don't know how to teach. Even if the child as ADAHD the teacher should change the style of teaching. By implying better concepts of teaching will have the child get good grades and also end the facts of bad home living or other factors preventing learning abilities
On a gold standard reward is given for success & hard work. Under the Rothschild FED, BOE etc reward is given regardless. Spending is given out to anyone who will add to the GDP.
Teacher who go to work on a free ride is, greedy, selfish, & basically lazy.
In the private sector lazy, or failure isn't rewarded. Gov workers should be disiplined more & harsh loss of earnings would be a good thing. - however Rothschild system is based on something for nothing so lazy spineless & useless behavour is rewarded & a side effect if the debt based monetary system. It can only change when the FED collapses in my view & revert back to gold standard, where GDP isn't important.
Performance related pay for teachers promotes a shadier side of activity, to make sure that the grades come first. Anything from spoon-feeding to downright cheating is promoted by this practice, and good old cooperation among colleagues is made less likely. Some benefits of simple old fashioned teaching are lost, and I feel that the more cut-throat competitive style has few advantages to recommend it.
Teachers cannot be directly assessed by student performance in a class. Teachers that teach difficult courses, such as physics and calculus, especially in a non-STEM school, cannot be judged this way. No matter how good they are, they will have a hefty amount of students suffering, even failing, in the class. They might be very high quality teachers. Also, this presents the problem of grade boosting. Teachers might be very easily coaxed into giving "fluff" assignments or just passing along students to boost their grades for classes and get a raise. This is unfair for the students, who reach higher level classes or college and are in for a very, very rude awakening.
My mum is a teacher, and her targets to set are for 3-4 year olds to be taught how to read in 2 months. This determines her level of pay, and it is not possible. In 2 months they might recognize 2 or 3 vowel sounds, but there is no way they will be able to read.