It’s looking like the Wisconsin Legislature will soon reform teacher salaries.
It’s long overdue. For nearly a century, teacher salaries have been based on years of service and advanced degrees, neither of which correlates with teacher quality. Performance is what counts, so performance is what should be rewarded.
Giving higher salaries to teachers who improve student performance is akin to capitalism. Giving the same salary to teachers regardless of performance is akin to socialism. Capitalism works; socialism doesn’t. Just ask China.
Wisconsin is doing the right thing. Other states should follow suit.
Will parents be taxed accordingly? Parents of under performing students pay at a higher rate for the additional cost in educating their children who came to school unprepared to learn. Tax breaks for parents of high achieving students should be offered as well though. Education is not capitalism. If it were, schools wouldn’t have any under performing students. Schools would be able to just send the child back to their parents/legal guardian/foster home and say, “This child is not up to our expectations. If you wish to continue as our supplier, you better step it up.” Because all of us over the age of 18 are products of this failed system of underachieving misfits, where do you think the education system failed you?
Cutter:
Perhaps the problem is that you are viewing parents as “suppliers” and students as supplies. Students are the schools’ CUSTOMERS, not supplies. Teachers are there to serve the customers. Those who serve the customers better should get paid more. That’s how capitalism rolls.
I suspect you have not been in a school recently.
Parents send their children to school without breakfast. I have had students who are pregnant, on ankle-bracelets from jail, and in shelter care. I do my best to teach them science, but sometimes I must just teach them about life. I would argue that I am a quality teacher and I am meeting my students needs (however basic they may be), but I guarantee you not every one of my students will do well on a science test.
Our education system is compulsory. It is not capitalism. Many of our “customers” would not choose to come to the store and shop if it were truly capitalism. And, believe it or not, many teenagers don’t care if they graduate from high school and their parents don’t know how to get them to care either. Many parents excuse the absences for their children when they skip school. It is impossible for me to teach students who are not there.
There is so much broken in our society and teachers serve many roles for many different students. I do feel teachers need to uphold a standard, but I think the measure is more complex than giving a student a test. And, parents do play a role in the equation and should be factored into the solution along with teachers.
anotherteacher:
You wrote: “Our education system is compulsory. It is not capitalism.” Our education system is only compulsory for students, not teachers. Teachers who can’t make adequate yearly progress are free to look for another job. You are right that our education system is not capitalistic—it’s currently socialistic because teacher salaries are not based on performance. My argument is that our education system should become capitalistic and pay teachers based on their performance.
I’ve observed many classrooms like yours. It’s true that it’s more difficult to teach students who are at the lowest levels of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, however, some teachers make more progress with those students than others. Those teachers should be paid more.
I completely disagree with merit pay. What about kids in inclusion classrooms? What about special education teachers and their students? Teachers could be improving and enhancing their students performance, but what if they don’t pass the standardized tests at the required level? How do you justify cutting wages for these teachers?
As someone in Wisconsin, there will be no merit pay, they are eliminating collective bargaining to lower all pay