February 18, 2008

12:39 PM

Tagged With:

Republicans support Indiana's teachers

House Republicans have long supported a simple concept: Good teachers should be paid more. With our children’s future in their hands, we believe that we should pay teachers enough to attract the best people. We should also reward the best teachers. We can do this by increasing pay for teachers that test well in their area of expertise. We should also reward teachers whose students perform well.

This common sense policy is supported heavily by Indiana voters.

The Democrats, however, are held hostage by the Indianapolis lobbyists for the teachers union. They oppose merit-based pay increases like many unions. So again, the common sense policies that Hoosiers support are being rejected by the Democrats in favor of the special interests.

Case in point: Rep. Tim Harris’ amendment to House Bill 1210. This bill would simply give teachers the option of taking a voluntary test.

(b) Not more than one (1) time during each five (5) year period, an individual may request to be tested by a written examination to demonstrate the individual's increasing level of proficiency in the subject areas in which the individual teaches.

(c) An individual who successfully demonstrates the individual's proficiency under subsection (b) is entitled to receive one thousand dollars ($1,000) each year for the five (5) years following the individual's demonstration of proficiency, paid to the individual by the governing body.

See the recent roll call here: http://www.in.gov/legislative/bills/2008/PDF/Hrollcal/0065.PDF.pdf.


Merit Pay?

On February 20th, 2008 varangianguard (not verified) said:

I agree teachers should be paid more, but the subject is really rocket science.

The problem I see is that you view this as something that is straightforward in nature, and I believe that to be naive and simplistic.

Let me address your two main solutions.

First, that a teacher who "tests" well in his/her "area of expertise" gets rewarded. Each school system seems to possess quite a bit of latitude in choosing instructional methodologies. So then, would you propose creating a test that reflected each school systems chosen methodology to test competency? Would you propose strict state-wide standardization of instructional methodologies? If so, what would be the time and management constraints for compliance? Plus, what kind of competency "test" format are you even comtemplating? Handwritten? Machine gradable? What would be the benchmarks for improving competency? I just think that this proposal needs quite a bit more consideration before jumping on any bandwagons for, or against it.

Second, regarding the concept of rewarding teachers whose students perform well. That is an idiotic concept. You propose to reward teachers based on a set of variables that the teacher may, or more usually will not, be able to influence or control to any degree. And, if you are talking about student performance on mandated achievement tests, there are some subjects taught that wouldn't even be accounted for by said tests. How would one propose to reward performance for teachers who don't teach reading, writing or arithmetic? How might one account for differences in adminstrational support provided by different school systems? How would one manage the differences in reporting methodologies as creations of differing personalities? This is simply an exercise in subjectivity. That isn't the way to motivate good employees.