We share evidence-based K-12 learning strategies that empower you to improve education.
I think it is simple....with a pool of 600 applicants, you can easily select the best teachers that fit the needs of your school. For that reason alone, they will have success. They are putting the priority on having quality teachers and don't need to worry about the occasional lazy or incompetent teacher that hides behind union protection. I wish them success!
I agree on all venues~ but I also know that my teachers DESERVE more, and that we, as a Nation, do not respect or pay our teachers as well as they do in other parts of the world.
I think the pay will attract and retain a better caliber of teacher for the long haul...and then you will have the "fire and passion" AND get paid to do it...win/win!
We say we "are not in it for the money" and that is true. I have been at this for 18 years and counting...but we DESERVE to be paid on the same scale as other professions that require Masters and Doctoral level degrees! We are WORTH it!
Bottom line, we are serving as "the Peace Corps" of the 21st Century...and no one understands that we are rapidly sliding into a digital and technological divide that we need to stop NOW!
I worked at an Alternative school where we didn't earn big money but had lots of time to work with other teachers on our teams. Teachers had a great deal of autonomy in selecting coursework. We focused on creating quality, engaging work. We were respected by our peers, parents and students. We worked incredible long hours and did so much above and beyond our job description for our kids. They were chronic and habitual truants who eventually realized we cared about them and started coming to school every day, even when ill, so they wouldn't miss anything. Sure big money for what I do (urban HS) would be nice. But what matters in education is the relationships between students and teachers. Will education improve if we attract more people who are in it for the bucks? I don't think so. I worked briefly at a charter and I would not have continued there for any amount of money. It was every man and woman for him/herself. There was no professionalism, the hours were ridiculous, and the only relationships anyone cared about were with the parents. When we get away from collecting data and letting parents run the show and get back to having teachers decide what is best for their students we will improve education.
I don't believe that a high teacher salary alone will improve student achievement. As previously stated by Mr. Moore the dedication, education, and attitude of the teacher is what directly affects the students. However, I believe that it is elitist and inaccurate to suggest that securing individuals who are Ivy League educated to become teachers can create better caliber teachers. Again, dedication, education, and attitude are very important, and teachers with these qualities can come from anywhere.
If you do it for the money your motivation is all wrong.
This is the classic industrial management "Throw money at the problem" short term fix.
Silly. Shall we increase superintendents' salaries to a cool million with double or nothing performance bonuses?
I think the salaries themselves are not the reason for student achievement's increase (if we predict it will increase), but rather the caliber of teacher. When the profession of teaching can start to attract people from Ivy League schools away from more lucrative professions like law, medicine, and finance (as this school is doing), then students are much more likely to be served well. The pay certainly helps, but the dedication, education, and attitude of the teachers is ultimately what directly affects the students.