Posted by: Tom Haig
on 22, May, 2012
One of the ways in which performance pay is going to solve the ‘long tail’ of underachievement is that it will encourage good teachers to stay in the classroom. The Minister says, “We need[…] to look at the structure of the career pathways so that excellent teachers aren't forced to become leaders or managers - in other words taken out of the classroom situation - because that would be the only way they could get a pay increase.”
On first blush this sounds a reasonable proposition, as of course teachers who are fantastic with students should not have to wave them goodbye and join the desk jockeys in order to pay off their mortgage before retiring.
Posted by: Rob
on 30, Mar, 2012
There's been considerable discussion in the office and among members about performance pay. I've put together some thoughts around this discussion. What do you think?
It is useful to first determine what is meant by 'performance' or 'merit' pay
Does it mean more pay for those who take on more work? Extra-duty payment.
It can mean pay for doing extra work over and above the teaching job you are employed for. We have such 'extra duty' pay for managing a department (units and MMAs) or being in charge of specific management functions (units, MMAs, SMAs).
Posted by: blogger
on 04, Feb, 2010
By Winged Avenger
2010 should be all about the NZ curriculum. Instead, the government is determined to railroad teachers into focusing on national standards.
Secondary teachers already know the downsides of too much summative assessment and league tables, both of which are key features of the national standards.
Teachers want to use the NZC as a platform for developing great teaching for diverse learners; parents want plain-English reporting of their kids’ progress. Neither group needs the national standards to achieve these goals.