Capt. Al Haynes sorta OT.

Margy Natalie wrote:

"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote:



How do you measure motivational abilities?

By how well the students in a given teacher's class learn and perform.


That doesn't always work. Last year in my classes I had borderline mentally
retarded students, students with autism, students with emotional disturbances,
students with memory disorders, etc. Even if they were highly motivated during
class sometimes the information turned to vapor by the time they got to their
next class. Kids with safty issues at home don't do homework, don't retain
information and tend not to do very well in school no matter what class they are
in. Kids who spend a few weeks during the term in juvie lock up tend not to
score real well on the tests either.

Nothing works always. However, I think that basing pay on service time
is just plain wrong. It is just like communism. You get the same
reward whether you work hard or coast along.

Merit pay systems aren't perfect as I said earlier, and they aren't
completely objective either. You still need administrators to use
judgement in cases like you mention above. However, warts and all, I
think pay for performance is simply better than pay for seat warming time.


Matt

Nothing works always. However, I think that basing pay on service time
is just plain wrong.

Why? They do it in other job areas. Workers with lots of experience who've
stuck with their career field are more able to deal with contingencies, have
gotten ongoing training to improve their skills, and have a wealth of lore that
enables them to help newer employees and continue operations smoothly since
they can refer to past events and understand the whole operating philosopy of
the firm or district. Sure beats having clueless rookies for the whole staff.

You are clueless.
See Ya - Not

Matthew S. Whiting wrote:
Newps wrote:

A year ago December the teachers in our district went on strike for
better pay and benefits. The conventional wisdom is that your typical
public school teacher is lucky to make $30K after many hard years of
teaching. Since teachers salaries are a matter of public record a
full page ad was taken out in the Sunday paper the first weekend of
the strike. Every teacher in the school district was listed, by name,
and how much they made for that current school year. Turns out the
average teacher salary is $41.5 here with 25-30% of the teachers
making more than $50K per year. Starting pay was mid $20's. You
could literally see the support for the teachers evaporate on that
Sunday. A settlement was reached shortly there after. A teacher
strike will not ever happen here again.


Did the teachers then post the salaries of the administration personnel?
That would be very eye opening...

That was also in the ad however it wasn't relavant because people
weren't complaing about the number of administrators or their pay,
before or after the ad.



Even the salaries you list above are way below the average in my area
for jobs that require a master's degree.

That depends where you live obviously. What was finally driven home to
a lot of people was the fact that simply by spending more dollars does
not make education better.

Newps wrote in message news:sckMb.28303$xy6.71345@attbi_s02...
Matthew S. Whiting wrote:
Newps wrote:

A year ago December the teachers in our district went on strike for
better pay and benefits. The conventional wisdom is that your typical
public school teacher is lucky to make $30K after many hard years of
teaching. Since teachers salaries are a matter of public record a
full page ad was taken out in the Sunday paper the first weekend of
the strike. Every teacher in the school district was listed, by name,
and how much they made for that current school year. Turns out the
average teacher salary is $41.5 here with 25-30% of the teachers
making more than $50K per year. Starting pay was mid $20's. You
could literally see the support for the teachers evaporate on that
Sunday. A settlement was reached shortly there after. A teacher
strike will not ever happen here again.


Did the teachers then post the salaries of the administration personnel?
That would be very eye opening...

That was also in the ad however it wasn't relavant because people
weren't complaing about the number of administrators or their pay,
before or after the ad.



Even the salaries you list above are way below the average in my area
for jobs that require a master's degree.

That depends where you live obviously. What was finally driven home to
a lot of people was the fact that simply by spending more dollars does
not make education better.

Amen to that..... Now, As Rodney King said " can we all just get along? "

Nothing works always. However, I think that basing pay on service time
is just plain wrong.

Why? They do it in other job areas. Workers with lots of experience who've
stuck with their career field are more able to deal with contingencies,
have
gotten ongoing training to improve their skills, and have a wealth of lore
that
enables them to help newer employees and continue operations smoothly
since
they can refer to past events and understand the whole operating philosopy
of
the firm or district. Sure beats having clueless rookies for the whole
staff.

Everything you say is true, of course.

Equally true is the assumption that, IF everything you say is true, this
employee will perform at a higher level and earn a performance-based pay
increase, rendering this discussion moot.

However, we all know that this is not always the case.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"
"StellaStar" wrote in message
...

Jay Honeck wrote:

Government pensions are good because government work pays less. The
good pensions are the compensation for working for less.


Dunno what government jobs YOU are looking at -- but around here, the
Gubmint jobs pay substantially MORE than their private sector equivalents.

Just one example: A secretary at the University of Iowa can easily clear
$40K per year -- AND have the best health care and retirement I've ever
seen, anywhere.

Well around here software engineers for the state don't get squat
compared to private industry. Neither do engineers working at any
level of government, actually.

Well around here software engineers for the state don't get squat
compared to private industry. Neither do engineers working at any
level of government, actually.

That is something odd about government jobs. Entry level positions seem to
pay way above standard wages, while professional level jobs seem to pay way
under standard.

Wonder why?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck wrote:
Well around here software engineers for the state don't get squat
compared to private industry. Neither do engineers working at any
level of government, actually.


That is something odd about government jobs. Entry level positions seem to
pay way above standard wages, while professional level jobs seem to pay way
under standard.

Wonder why?

Because the civil service system is largely based on seniority and
arbitrary job classifications rather than market value as in the private
sector.

Matt