![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Dear Julie Bishop . . .
Apr. 12th, 2007 08:16 amShut up!
Our esteemed education minister believes that performance pay will attract better teachers into the education business. Because the teachers we have now just aren't up to the job of teaching children effectively in falling apart classrooms with no support or resources. Personally, at the school I'm at, all I see is great teachers doing amazing things with children who have behaviour issues, children who have disabilities and children who are on the enrichment (or gifted and talented program) (in my case, that was all in the same class *g*). So to say that more money will attract better teachers is just insulting to the teachers who are struggling at the moment.
The problem is not attracting good teachers to the business. Good teachers want to be teachers, they're not there for the money (just ask any supply/substitute teacher). Keeping good teachers is the problem - especially after a while when they realise that they're expected to teach rules, success, anti-bullying, good dental care, good nutrition, instead of, you know, english and maths.
I can think of a dozen different ways to attract more good teachers. Performance pay doesn't come near it. Under Julie Bishops 'do-it-or-we'll-hold-back-your-funding' performance pay plan, my pay would be decided by:
-an 'independent outsider' coming to my class and watching me teach
-I'd have to take a test (who knows what would be tested - and when you consider the educational backgrounds of different teachers of different ages . . . )
-I'd need to be interviewed (again. I still remember the abuse I copped at the last interview)
-We'd need to prove that we've done adequate professional development etc.
-My principal would have to like me
-My students and their parents would be asked to fill in a questionnaire about my performance. MY STUDENTS. If we have to point out the flaws in this one . . .
(This would probably cost a lot of money to set all this up. Damn, there goes the fixing of the window in my old classroom. Spose we better get used to having a big piece of timber nailed over it. Oh, and what about stopping that strange dust from falling on the teacher's desk?)
Pay as You Learn - this article from The Age, discusses the whole thing in more depth.
Personally, I'm ok with the pay. I'd like more resources, support and time. And I'd like some of that support to come from the top. (Oh, that's funny) Even the principal of my school was telling me that he's tired of being the punching bag for the politicians and the media. Give us a break and let us teach.
Our esteemed education minister believes that performance pay will attract better teachers into the education business. Because the teachers we have now just aren't up to the job of teaching children effectively in falling apart classrooms with no support or resources. Personally, at the school I'm at, all I see is great teachers doing amazing things with children who have behaviour issues, children who have disabilities and children who are on the enrichment (or gifted and talented program) (in my case, that was all in the same class *g*). So to say that more money will attract better teachers is just insulting to the teachers who are struggling at the moment.
The problem is not attracting good teachers to the business. Good teachers want to be teachers, they're not there for the money (just ask any supply/substitute teacher). Keeping good teachers is the problem - especially after a while when they realise that they're expected to teach rules, success, anti-bullying, good dental care, good nutrition, instead of, you know, english and maths.
I can think of a dozen different ways to attract more good teachers. Performance pay doesn't come near it. Under Julie Bishops 'do-it-or-we'll-hold-back-your-funding' performance pay plan, my pay would be decided by:
-an 'independent outsider' coming to my class and watching me teach
-I'd have to take a test (who knows what would be tested - and when you consider the educational backgrounds of different teachers of different ages . . . )
-I'd need to be interviewed (again. I still remember the abuse I copped at the last interview)
-We'd need to prove that we've done adequate professional development etc.
-My principal would have to like me
-My students and their parents would be asked to fill in a questionnaire about my performance. MY STUDENTS. If we have to point out the flaws in this one . . .
(This would probably cost a lot of money to set all this up. Damn, there goes the fixing of the window in my old classroom. Spose we better get used to having a big piece of timber nailed over it. Oh, and what about stopping that strange dust from falling on the teacher's desk?)
Pay as You Learn - this article from The Age, discusses the whole thing in more depth.
Personally, I'm ok with the pay. I'd like more resources, support and time. And I'd like some of that support to come from the top. (Oh, that's funny) Even the principal of my school was telling me that he's tired of being the punching bag for the politicians and the media. Give us a break and let us teach.
