• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should teachers be paid purely based on years of experience?

Should teachers be paid purely based on years of experience?


  • Total voters
    32
It doesn't really matter where the money comes from. We're talking maybe $20,000 at most for a LARGE school. That isn't going to break the bank.
Dream on, businesses see govt contracts as a license to steal....
I have personally stuck my nose into school business, but was asked to. I have fixed, for free, computers that "need a new mother board". It was a cracked solder joint one time, a loose connection another time....
Some crook was trying to sell a portable sound system to my wife's school, for about $3000, and it was basic home style consumer junk worth about $1500. I built them a system using commercial grade stuff for less, all I had to do was tell Guitar Center it was being paid for by a school, and they offered discounts immediately.
 
Kids are born with an innate ability to learn so no you do not have to teach that. Schooling numbs and kills the creative minds of the kids so they will follow orders and obey whoever is in charge. I remember that well from my 13 years in public indoctrination. Our schools perform worse out of the industrial world because it's not designed to teach, but to get kids to be good little robots and follow orders. This is why you see on the news all the time about students being arrested for jumping in puddles and not minding a teacher. Also, the student must be interested in learning those subjects and naturally will have a well rounded education as evidenced by the way charter and certain private schools are run. The student decides what classes they want to take because it interests them.
It is good that some can do home schooling, but the majority are not capable of doing that, or have the time...
 
That's the problem with the Prussian style system that we have. It's focused on the needs of the country as a whole while ignoring the needs of the students. Is it any wonder that Sylvan Learning Centers are outperforming public indoctrination? Back when I was in school the push was for scientists based upon the perceived need for them in the late 50's and 60's. I was in high school in the mid to late 80's. The government, and by extension businesses, cannot meet the educational needs of kids.
Private schools do better because they can choose the students, and they do. Public schools can't exclude the ones they don't want...
 
It is good that some can do home schooling, but the majority are not capable of doing that, or have the time...

The majority are unable to do it because of two factors. The first is that the parents have received a substandard education by the public indoctrination system. The second is that the government has made it to where both parents have to work due to the sheer amount of taxes people have to pay.
 
Private schools do better because they can choose the students, and they do. Public schools can't exclude the ones they don't want...

Private schools cannot pick and choose students. They have to accept everyone if their parents can pay for it. It's against the law in every state to allow private schools to pick and choose. As far as excluding students, public schools do it all the time. It's called expulsion.
 
Do you know how many textbooks $20,000 would buy? That money would nearly pay for a teacher's aid. What a waste of money that would be.

So on the one hand, for $20,000 you could ALMOST hire one teacher's aide for a single class, who might or might not be effective, and who might or might not have any measurable impact on the students' achievement. But we'll never know, since we refuse to measure it and smugly ridicule any attempt to do so...

On the other hand, we could spend the same amount of money (or probably a lot less) to analyze the data of every single student in the entire school, every single teacher in the entire school, cross-reference all the statistics based on the particular demographics and abilities of each class, compute what kind of results an average teacher would achieve, and determine exactly how effective all the teachers were for their specific classes. And we could then use this data to improve the overall quality of teachers and benefit ALL of the students in the school.

Yet *my* idea wastes money. :roll:

Layla said:
Teachers do data analysis now on test scores. They usually do this after school, beyond their contracted day. They do it not evaluate what they should be paid but how to better help their students.

And neither they nor the administrators will ever know if they're actually doing that, since the school refused to shell out the pittance necessary to measure it.
 
Last edited:
Private schools cannot pick and choose students. They have to accept everyone if their parents can pay for it. It's against the law in every state to allow private schools to pick and choose. As far as excluding students, public schools do it all the time. It's called expulsion.

Private schools can turn away students, even if their parents have the money. It is way many now have those stupid tests that kids have to take.
 
Private schools can turn away students, even if their parents have the money. It is way many now have those stupid tests that kids have to take.

Not in my state can a private school do that. If a private school does turn away a student it must be for a valid reason like not enough classroom space or poor student behavior etc...
 
Not in my state can a private school do that. If a private school does turn away a student it must be for a valid reason like not enough classroom space or poor student etc...

Well I went to private schools in four different states and in each one I had to take a test. If I didn't do well I wasn't allowed in.
 
Well I went to private schools in four different states and in each one I had to take a test. If I didn't do well I wasn't allowed in.

That's part of being allowed into the school and to see how close you are to the school's academic level. Tests were instituted because of the failure of public schools to teach. However, I do know that Catholic and many church schools will not turn away a student.
 
I've actually looked quite a bit for what improves student results, but I haven't seen any evidence suggesting that more training has an effect. Perhaps you can link me to the study to which you are referring.

I truly don't understand why someone would think that training on how best to do a job would not make someone better at that job. I know of several training options that are said to improve scores. In a short search I found over 10 pages of articles about a study that showed that merit pay did not improve test scores. Here are a few other things I found.

Study: Teacher Bonuses Don't Improve Test Scores : NPR

Raising Elementary Math Scores: Strategies to Help Elementary Students Do Better on Math Tests
Teachers' Training, Class Size and Students' Outcomes: Learning from Administrative Forecasting Mistakes
http://www.sitesbysheridan.com/ACTIONRSEARCHmath.pdf

not a study, but interesting
How to Improve National Math Scores - NYTimes.com
 
Kids are born with an innate ability to learn so no you do not have to teach that. Schooling numbs and kills the creative minds of the kids so they will follow orders and obey whoever is in charge. I remember that well from my 13 years in public indoctrination. Our schools perform worse out of the industrial world because it's not designed to teach, but to get kids to be good little robots and follow orders. This is why you see on the news all the time about students being arrested for jumping in puddles and not minding a teacher. Also, the student must be interested in learning those subjects and naturally will have a well rounded education as evidenced by the way charter and certain private schools are run. The student decides what classes they want to take because it interests them.
I'm sorry that your experience was so bad. I can assure that this does not describe how I teach nor how the other teachers I know teach. What I think is damaging how kids look at education is all the testing that is now required. There is no room for flexibility. Study can't be guided by the interests of the students it has to be focused on what will be on the test.
 
Private schools cannot pick and choose students. They have to accept everyone if their parents can pay for it. It's against the law in every state to allow private schools to pick and choose. As far as excluding students, public schools do it all the time. It's called expulsion.

It is very difficult to expel a student from public schools. Of course private schools can pick and chose. They usually do so on the basis of academic achievement. They can also kick out students who don't measure up or cause trouble. Just the fact that private school are limited to those who can afford it and more importantly, are willing to spend that money on their kids makes the comparison of public to private completely unfair.
I know of a very few examples where home schooling has been done well. I know of way too many where the parents blamed the school for their kids' problems so they decide to home school. After a few years they send the kid back and they are years behind their age mates and still somehow this is the school's fault.
 
I'm sorry that your experience was so bad. I can assure that this does not describe how I teach nor how the other teachers I know teach. What I think is damaging how kids look at education is all the testing that is now required. There is no room for flexibility. Study can't be guided by the interests of the students it has to be focused on what will be on the test.

Every child goes through this, including you. Think back to how you learned in school. You had zero say on what classes to take and you had to learn via memorization. John Gatto was teacher of the year for New York and was drummed out because he got his students to learn. I suggest you read his free book that I linked to. It's eye opening on what the system does and how it was created for the sole purpose of turning out drones that cannot think for themselves or apply critical thought.
 
So on the one hand, for $20,000 you could ALMOST hire one teacher's aide for a single class, who might or might not be effective, and who might or might not have any measurable impact on the students' achievement. But we'll never know, since we refuse to measure it and smugly ridicule any attempt to do so...

On the other hand, we could spend the same amount of money (or probably a lot less) to analyze the data of every single student in the entire school, every single teacher in the entire school, cross-reference all the statistics based on the particular demographics and abilities of each class, compute what kind of results an average teacher would achieve, and determine exactly how effective all the teachers were for their specific classes. And we could then use this data to improve the overall quality of teachers and benefit ALL of the students in the school.

Yet *my* idea wastes money. :roll:



And neither they nor the administrators will ever know if they're actually doing that, since the school refused to shell out the pittance necessary to measure it.

You have no concept of how a school is run if you think $20,000 is a pittance.
 
It is very difficult to expel a student from public schools. Of course private schools can pick and chose. They usually do so on the basis of academic achievement. They can also kick out students who don't measure up or cause trouble. Just the fact that private school are limited to those who can afford it and more importantly, are willing to spend that money on their kids makes the comparison of public to private completely unfair.
I know of a very few examples where home schooling has been done well. I know of way too many where the parents blamed the school for their kids' problems so they decide to home school. After a few years they send the kid back and they are years behind their age mates and still somehow this is the school's fault.

It's actually quite easy to be expelled from school. Bring a toy gun to school and we'll see how long you'll be able to attend. Ask too many questions and you will be expelled for causing trouble.
 
Every child goes through this, including you. Think back to how you learned in school. You had zero say on what classes to take and you had to learn via memorization. John Gatto was teacher of the year for New York and was drummed out because he got his students to learn. I suggest you read his free book that I linked to. It's eye opening on what the system does and how it was created for the sole purpose of turning out drones that cannot think for themselves or apply critical thought.

I saw no link.

I loved school. I had a great deal of choice in high school and took some really great classes. I was even able to help teach younger students. In some classes we learned by rote memorization when appropriate to the subject but in others we had great discussions. I had a science class in which we got to move through the book at our own pace doing the experiments ourselves. Education is not all it could be today due to over testing and interference by people(politicians) who know nothing about education. However, it is not the terrible place you seem to think it is.
 
It's actually quite easy to be expelled from school. Bring a toy gun to school and we'll see how long you'll be able to attend. Ask too many questions and you will be expelled for causing trouble.

Bringing a gun would likely get you expelled - and why not. Asking questions will not, nor should it. Like most things, it varies from state to state. I do have first hand knowledge of a student who beat up another student, having to be pulled off more than once, and she hit a teacher. She was not expelled.
 
I saw no link.

I loved school. I had a great deal of choice in high school and took some really great classes. I was even able to help teach younger students. In some classes we learned by rote memorization when appropriate to the subject but in others we had great discussions. I had a science class in which we got to move through the book at our own pace doing the experiments ourselves. Education is not all it could be today due to over testing and interference by people(politicians) who know nothing about education. However, it is not the terrible place you seem to think it is.

Sorry, I had posted the link earlier with my literacy link. Here's the link. I'm glad that you had a positive experience with the government mill. Education has been on a steady decline due to the government. Everything the government touches turns to crap, which is a fact of life.
 
Bringing a gun would likely get you expelled - and why not. Asking questions will not, nor should it. Like most things, it varies from state to state. I do have first hand knowledge of a student who beat up another student, having to be pulled off more than once, and she hit a teacher. She was not expelled.

You missed the qualifier for gun which was toy. A toy gun, especially ones made for action figures, isn't a threat to anyone, but this eight year old is paying for zero common sense by the school. I went to a rural Iowa school, so we were allowed to bring in shotguns for PE's skeet shooting. The PE class also taught gun safety.
 
Sorry, I had posted the link earlier with my literacy link. Here's the link. I'm glad that you had a positive experience with the government mill. Education has been on a steady decline due to the government. Everything the government touches turns to crap, which is a fact of life.

I'll assume then that you'll never draw medicare, enjoy the protection of the military, drive on interstate highways, or engage in anything else related to the government. Maybe you should move to a different country if this one is so terrible.
 
I'll assume then that you'll never draw medicare, enjoy the protection of the military, drive on interstate highways, or engage in anything else related to the government. Maybe you should move to a different country if this one is so terrible.

Why should I move from my country when I'm quite happy with the people? The government is not the country, but the people are. My dad taught me the best bit of advice, which is I love my country, but I hate my government. This is coming from a Vietnam vet that lost 62 of his best friends in the Mekong Delta. Besides there is such a thing as freedom of thought and expression. Are you saying that I'm not allowed to enjoy my freedoms just because you disagree with me?
 
I've heard of cases like this and it is crazy but this is not the whole system. It is one school that has gone too far.

What about the schools in New York City where children as young as 5 are arrested for failing to listen to the teachers? What about schools that lose accredidation from the state? Should they still be allowed to teach when they have demonstrated that they cannot?
 
I truly don't understand why someone would think that training on how best to do a job would not make someone better at that job.

I'm not saying it doesn't, I'm saying I've never seen any evidence that indicates that it does, in the case of teaching. And generally whenever I see a post starting with "I truly don't understand why someone would think..." in the absence of empirical evidence, that's a red flag to me that the conventional wisdom needs to be challenged.

Layla_Z said:
I know of several training options that are said to improve scores. In a short search I found over 10 pages of articles about a study that showed that merit pay did not improve test scores. Here are a few other things I found.

Study: Teacher Bonuses Don't Improve Test Scores : NPR

I cited the problems with that conclusion in Post #33.

Layla_Z said:

Those are all good teaching approaches that seem to have empirical evidence behind them.

Layla_Z said:

This study specifically says that the training that benefited the students was only geared toward subject matter competence, rather than teaching methods. I agree that teachers need to know their subject inside and out...I just question whether training in teaching methodology actually benefits students.

Layla_Z said:

I'm not sure what conclusion you draw from this study.

Layla_Z said:

I agree with most of these strategies.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom