Governor Dennis Daugaard's merit bonus proposal is based on the belief that handing an extra $5000 to each of the top 20% of teachers at each school will drive healthy competition and inspire teachers to teach more effectively.
Unfortunately, Governor Daugaard's own Secretary of Education, dispatched right away to the press as top cheerleader for the Governor's plan, appears not to believe that bonuses and competition motivate the best teachers:
[Cara Hetland 27:02]: One teacher reaction yesterday after hearing this was, o.k., so now I'm not sharing my ideas with anybody. The collaboration part of teaching is going to disappear because would I want to share my ideas if I'm competing now for cash with the teacher next door.
[Sec. Melody Schopp]: I have a lot of faith in the teaching force. I was one of them, so I believe, you know, I truly know that educators want to do what's best for our kids. That's their heart, that's their soul. That may happen with some individuals, but I think that very quickly that will show who our great teachers are.... Those teachers are always going to give back to the profession 100% whether or not they might consider them being eligible for that or not. So is there going to be some competition? There might be competition, but again, competition with each other we hope will result in quality outcomes for our kids.
[emphasis mine; Secretary of Education Melody Schopp, interview with Cara Hetland, SDPB.org Dakota Midday, 2012.01.11].
I believe... I truly know... I think... we hope... all those positive little Kristi-Noemy fluff words suggest a little insecurity in this statement.
Secretary Schopp reveals the major fallacy in Governor Daugaard's proposal. South Dakota has had the worst teacher pay in the nation for over a decade. Like any industry, we have some slackers, but we also have a lot of people (I'd wager more than 20%) who look that crappy pay in the eye, shrug, and give their all in the classroom. Some of those teachers will play the games required (more committee work, national certification) to win the bonuses; others will ignore jumping through the hoops and keep focusing on doing what they love and what really matters: pouring heart and soul into their vocation, into our kids.
Melody must have been reading
http://www.amazon.com/Drive-Surprising-Truth-About-Motivates/dp/1594484805/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1326465059&sr=1-1
Apparently the people proposing this bonus system are unfamiliar with personality type testing and assume that everyone's motivation is money, which it obviously is not, otherwise we wouldn't have the good teachers we have already. Maybe have teachers take a Meyers/Briggs test to determine what each would consider a proper reward and then do a motivation plan. There are only about 16 basic personality types, but it's important to realize that each has distinctly different ideas about what they consider gratifying. My hunch is, some of the best teachers we have may find this new monetary proposal insulting.
[CAH: Bill, if the boss looks at my idealism and says, "Cool! Cory doesn't need a bonus to motivate him," and then turns to some extrinsicially motivated teacher and hands her a $5000 bonus just because she has a different psychological make-up, I will be torqued.]
Kayla Gahagan: "Red Cloud Indian School language teacher Philomine Lakota said the desire to learn the language can't be tied directly to success in school anyway, or it won't be reason enough for students to learn it."
Here is an outline of the basic personality types.
Note that each has it's own set of gratification values.
http://www.myersbriggs.org/my-mbti-personality-type/mbti-basics/the-16-mbti-types.asp
And here are some ideas on how teachers can use personality knowledge to improve student performance:
http://www.personalitypathways.com/MBTI_articles4.html
My suggestion is to consider these types throughout the system, for both teachers and students.
It wouldn't hurt if our political leaders took the tests too and shared them with one another. It might facilitate our deeper understanding and appreciation for one another.
And it would be definitely better than the status quo wherein we all presume to know what the other guy is thinking, when in fact, we may not have the sligtest clue (are you listening, Sibby?)
"are you listening, Sibby?"
Yes Bill, you hate me because you can't control what I say. And teachers are much better at figuring out the kids than their parents, because they are experts trained by the universities by super smart control freaks. So keep deleting my comments Cory.
As much as you would perhaps like me to hate you, Sibby, I don't. I do feel sorry for you however. Because you are out of your mind, brother.
Bill,
I like the Meyers/Briggs and Kiersy Bates Stuff as well. It's kind of tough to use if only one teacher does it in one class, but it would be good for grouping students. I also like this Strength Finder stuff: http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_c_1_19?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=first+break+all+the+rules&sprefix=first+break+all+the%2Caps%2C397
"As much as you would perhaps like me to hate you, Sibby"
I like you to hate me? Bill you just confirmed that you are the one that is out of your mind. So why issue all of this personal attacks? It is not healthy for you Bill.
Give it up, Sibby. All you are doing is making a fool of yourself.
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Persecution_complex
“The central belief of every moron is that he is the victim of a mysterious conspiracy against his common rights and true desserts. He ascribes all his failure to get on in the world, all of his congenital incapacity and damfoolishness, to the machinations of werewolves assembled in Wall Street, or some other such den of infamy. †—H.L. Mencken
"All you are doing is making a fool of yourself."
Bill, I view the truth to be more important than my popularity. You can call it crazy if you like, but I would rather be a fool who seeks truth, than an expert you thinks he is the truth.
A couple of comments: But first, I agree with Bill and the Secretary. But I don't think it deems performance bonuses not effective.
1) People are motivated primarily two items: A desire to do good and for the good they do to be recognized (not recognized to stroke their ego but because recognition is both witness to others but is feedback on what they don't do so well).
2) Motivation needs to be fed and nurtured both internally and externally. Bill and Melody are addressing that what is internal. But it doesn't address what must be done externally. External food and nurture gives strength and energy to bear the tough moments, to climb the mountain when it doesn't seem "worth it." External "food" is expression of gratitude from parents, students and the "boss," it is a gift card, and it can be a performance bonus.
3) And it can be a way for a teacher to say to their spouse "thank you" for your sacrifice by giving them the means to pay for a vacation not in the budget or just a dinner at an expensive restaurant.
Now that I'm on a roll. Let me add a couple of other comments.
As a stakeholder (as citizen and taxpayer) I have both a desire to recognize the best for being the best and an obligation to nurture what is in the best already.
And, I can't help but notice the visceral reaction opposed to recognizing the best. And, I have some rhetorical questions.
1) Is it a fear of the negative affect on teacher who don't get bonuses? Is it related to the same "self-esteem" mantra that gives every kid a ribbon for participation? My first comment is these are adults not children. But less discuss it.
2) Is it a belief that people don't think our administrators can execute it fairly? My first comment is two fold: We don't know until we try and maybe it confirmation the challenges in education is as much if not more at the top. Well, let's discuss that.
Or is it something else. This visceral reaction is either at its core:
1) Based on ignorance/misunderstanding requiring greater conversation/leadership.
2) Based on facts/information which is not fully grasped by the proponents requiring greater conversation.
But in either case, it doesn't preclude the potential effectiveness/appropriateness of performance bonuses. Only that to be effective, more communication needs to be done so the obstacles are removed or they are designed to be optimally successful.
Okay, maybe, Troy. But also consider this. Who is ultimately responsible for excellence in education? Maybe it's the student.
Troy, so it is about control. The Marxist left want to control minds via indoctrination and the monopoly capitalists want to control our minds with our tax money.
So based on Cory's position, quality of education will not be affected by cutting teachers pay because great teachers are not motivated by money. Or is it that we have to pay all the teachers the same or they will envy each other. Great teachers would be so motivated by money that they will not collaborate with other teachers. So which way is it Cory; are we motivated by money or not?
Bill,
Who is ultimately responsible for the stability of a building? The design engineer/architect. But that doesn't mean the maker of the steel, cement doesn't have to do his part. It doesn't mean the person who joins the girders doesn't have to do his part.
A chain is no stronger than its weakest link. The current approach is not exposing or fixing the weakest link. Is it students? Some teachers? Most teachers? Administrators (some or most)? School Boards? Parents? And who/how can we shore up the weak links? Maybe asking more from the strongest links (ie the best teachers)?
I have no illusions that the Governor's proposal is the magic bullet. I'm thinking there is much more to be done (and I have ideas :) ). But, in my gut and based on my experiences (in business, as student, as parent, as member of a school advisory board, as citizen), this pebble in the pond of education is going to lead to bigger and better items. But first, we must throw the pebble in the water.
I'm typing this on a phone so there may be errors.
I'll try to take Troy's two main points 1 by 1.
I have railed against self-esteem based education. I probably have a few blog posts up on it. I have a daughter in college and two cars with transmission pproblem, so a little extra cash would be nice, but I'll make do. In short your first concern isn't a big deal to me
2. You're right. I don't trust the evaluation to be fair. I see petty games played every day. They will be played with these evaluations.
My biggest visceral reaction comes from tying these to standardized tests. Students lose nothing by failing the test and gain nothing by doing well. Like many other teachers I have seen great bubble pattern art.
3. I will add one other point. Teachers would not be ignored in this process if they leaned Republican. These proposals are political punishment. I too am a stqkeholder, but my voice will not be listened to in the effort to modify some of the most egregious flaws in the Governor's proposal. Resisting political punishment and knowing I will be ignored tends to produce visceral responses
A building doesn't have any say in whether it wants to be build or not, Troy. Neither do the building's parents. Not a very good analogy, my friend.
LK,
I agree alot of the evaluations will both be unfair and have to deal with perceptions of unfairness. That is life. But, if we never try ("test" our administrators) we never will know if they are more good than bad.
I agree standardized tests may not be the best solution. Personally, I think they should ultimatately substantially be based on the judgment of the Principal/Superintendent. The good ones will do it well. Those who don't will either learn how real fast or need to find another job. In business and state government with less "management" training and experience making a lot less money do it well every day. This can be done fairly and to good.
Your third point is balderdash. Come to the table with ideas to make it work/improve it and offer complimentary solutions/additions/reforms and you will be listened to. But to viscerally fight the reforms coming will marginalize you. The demand for fundamental reform is across the broad body politic and it will happen. The only choice is to be on the train trying to move it down the track or be left at the station.
"No Bill, it is the parents." I submit, Sibby, that since you are not a parent, you have no idea what you're talking about. None whatsoever...unqualified to make that judgement call.
Besides, do you really want us blaming your parents for the way you turned out?
LK,
Hit send not remembering a point I was going to make.
Starting the evaluations based on the objective (standardized tests) is good as with all change, overall people on both sides will be more comfortable with the objective. But, over time, they will graduate to the subjective. And, I think it is the subjective intangible realm where the best are distinguished.
The bus is bumpy so I expect more errors.
Troy,
I am willing to accept that you and I could sit at a table and compromise. Based on a Blogomore post, your Governor is determined to test and determined to keep the bonuses at an individual raher than a building or high school department level. I'm not sure where the table is, but it doesn't look as if there is anything left to talk about.
By the way, I also forgot to mention that I refuse to accept that literture and debate are less important than STEM. So you're right my reaction to that part of the proposal is pure rage.
LK,
A few comments.
1) Compromise is not the goal. It is to discern the best. And, it takes trial and error. The more bold the idea the more necessity for trial and error.
2) Starting with the objective and moving to the subjective is the tried and true process in every change/reform. Creates better baselines for future change.
3) "Team bonus" structures are generally less effective. They have a place but they too are out-growths of starting with the individual. Again, tried and true.
4) I agree STEM is not the most important. But the challenge is more immediate there. Bill doesn't like my analogies. We might know the "car" has alot of parts that need fixing. All are important. But I have a flat tire. Let me worry first about the flat tire. Tomorrow, I can fix the brakes.
LK, I'm confident in ten years, this will look a lot different. And, I know the impulse is why not get to the end. However, it is necessary to walk the path to get to the end. This is just the first step.
"I submit, Sibby, that since you are not a parent, you have no idea what you’re talking about. None whatsoever…unqualified to make that judgement call."
OK Mr. It Takes a Village Bill Fleming. Now you are saying that those who don't have kids in the education system have no say? So then why are we paying the taxes to fund education? Cory has already stated this morning that my money is good, but my say on how it is being used needs to be censored. I can use censor here because the person hwo deletes my comments about how public education is run is a paid employee of the government, uses this web site to increase his pay. If anybody should have no right to speak on this issue, it should be the ones getting the money. You would think that they would be thankful to the taxpayers, but no.
The only fair, equal, and just system solution is to privatize all education. Cory already has made the argument that teachers care for the kids, and not the money, so they may do it for free. If parents want their kids education, then they need to pay for it or raise funds. Homeschoolers already take on the responsibility without teh government.
This idea that I am a fool but we are all too glad to covet my money tells me what religion is being fostered here. No wonder we have all of this back and forth on blogs and in our society today. It is all about money. Sorry if that truth does not fit your definition about what this particular post is suppose to be about Cory.
Troy,
I have to go coach and judge soon, so this will be brief.
Let's agree we all want what's best. I'll do what I tell my kids not to do and argue the analogy. I submit that it's far safer to fix the brakes today and the flat tomorrow. A car with bad brakes and good tires is dangerous. My best and yours obviously differ.
The point is the Governor's idea of best practice differs from Finland and Diane Ravitch and others have convincing research that it won't work.
I know you believe it "balderdash" but nothing in our exchange has shaken my belief that this plan is political retribution.
Finally, I envy your "Morning in South Danota" optimism. I'm convinced this journey will make the Odyssey seem like a Sunday drive in the country.
So much for brief
In three decades of observing professional educators, it's clear to me the two areas of discussion that get them most excited and interested are compensation and time off.
I studied to be a teacher and am related to and friends with numerous educators. While I respect them, and in some cases love them, I have heard them talk of pay, benefits, retirement and time off far more than anything else.
That must mean something, and I fear what that is. It also explains a lot about our schools and graduates.
"In three decades of observing professional educators, it’s clear to me the two areas of discussion that get them most excited and interested are compensation and time off."
Tom, the reason teachers have talked compensation for 3 decades, really longer. my dad was a teacher and he also talked about compensation, is because South Dakota has been 51st in the nation in wages for decades. the empahsis from Republicans has been not to pay teachers. For the most South Dakota teachers have been dedicated to the job even though they have been treated poorly over trhe years.
Now the Governor want to dump on them and finally teachers are responding.
I guess I'm not quite sure what you mean by time off
Any thoughts on how this would effect teachers in Sioux Falls' Rosa Parks Immersion Program or other "non-traditional" public education programs? I think that it is exciting that Sioux Falls Public schools are willing to explore alternatives to the traditional public school experience, but comparing the test results of Rosa Parks Spanish Immersion students to those of students at Laura Wilder would be comparing apples to oranges.
Won't tying teacher pay to test results discourage innovation in the classroom?
"Tom, the reason teachers have talked compensation for 3 decades, really longer. my dad was a teacher and he also talked about compensation, is because South Dakota has been 51st in the nation in wages for decades. "
Owen, you may be getting yourself into trouble. The subject of this post is that teachers don't care about money, they only care about the kids. Focus. Stay on topic.
[CAH: I can moderate my own blog, Steve, thank you.]
I was referring to the "workload" of educators, with long breaks for Xmas, several three-day and four-day weekends and three months off for summer. Why do schools stick with a schedule designed for an agrarian society that needed kids to work on farms? Other nations don't, and examine the difference. For the hours they put in, teachers are relatively well paid, with great retirement packages.
"...teachers are relatively well paid..." Compared to what, Tom?
http://www.teacherportal.com/teacher-salaries-by-state
Using the linked chart, and your theory about it being all about the money, tell us why a good teacher would rather stay in SD than move to... oh say, Colorado, Oregan, Nebraska or Minnesota. (p.s. I'm thinking there are probably teachers who think reporters don't really work very hard either, brother.)
So a school district could pay math and science teachers 5 k less than other teachers and use the state money to pay for other expenses?
Tom, my wife is usually grading papers late into the night and as far as the 3 months off during the summer teachers are usually taking classes to stay certified and doing it at their own expense. Teachers actually pay into the retirement.
If you compare teachers with 4 year degrees with others with the same education teachers are at the low end of the scale.
Steve: Teachers can care about their kids but still want a life and provide for there family. I hope that's ok with you Steve and your fellow right-wing nutbags
Mr. Jones said:
Or is it something else. This visceral reaction is either at its core:
1) Based on ignorance/misunderstanding requiring greater conversation/leadership.
2) Based on facts/information which is not fully grasped by the proponents requiring greater conversation.
Translation: Anyone who disagrees with me is either ignorant or stupid. All smart, well-informed people necessarily agree with me and my superior insight and/or leadership.
Wow. Just... wow.
Bill, I know editors such as myself and reporters don't make a lot of money but neither do we spend a lot of time focused on that. Educators, as this thread so clearly shows, are fixated on the topic. I have long realized that.
And we are:
1. Not public employees.
2. Not given a long break every year plus numerous smaller ones. We work a ton of hours, brother, and all year long, including nights, weekends and holidays.
3. Not earning a decent, and publicly funded in part, retirement.
A couple who both teach in SD, and have for 20 years or so, are making about $100,000 in total with extended leave and great retirement. Spare me the violins for these folks. I am happy for their comfortable lives, but wish they would cease the moaning and complaining.
They're fine, really. And the lazy, inept ones, and there are many -- far, far too many -- get the same pay and benefits.
However, it is sad that working class people scrap and compete for the few dollars allowed to us in this society. The real problem lies elsewhere.
Okay, so if you think it's sad to scrap like that, Tom, then why do it?
https://public.rcas.org/hr/Documents/SalaryRanking2.pdf
http://www.teachersalaryinfo.com/average-teacher-salary-south-dakota.html
Plus 15 weeks of vacation a year.
No Chris,
Either the person who is reacting viscerally is ignorant (doesn't choose to know all the facts) or hasn't communicated their thoughts rationally. By definition, visceral is emotion. Give me more thoughts on why this is bad with facts and knowledge. I'll listen.
How about this, just off the top of my head:
I know for a fact that murder is bad. There are many reasons why any particular murder is bad: It deprives a person of life, it deprives family and friends of a loved one, it violates the law, and it violates religious tenets, for starters. Yet I also have a visceral reaction against murder. I viscerally abhor it. That doesn't make me irrational. I both have detailed reasons for abhorring murder and I have a visceral reaction to it.
How's that?
Montana's Education Job Portal
http://opi.mt.gov/MTJob_applications/
Sounds like Tom would rather have a teaching job, huh? Also, like he doesn't like being called a reporter? Whoops. Sorry, big fella.
Look, Lawrence, the topic is about teacher compensation. To accuse people of being fixated on money because they comment on a blog post about money is just goofy. What would you rather they write about?
I'm noticing you have no problem grousing about the fact you think you are underpaid. So why bust people's chops here when they want to air their thoughts on the matter?
What is it you would have them do? Just shut up and be glad they weren't foolish enough to take a job at a newspaper? Give us a break.
"[CAH: Bill, if the boss looks at my idealism and says, "Cool! Cory doesn't need a bonus to motivate him," and then turns to some extrinsicially motivated teacher and hands her a $5000 bonus just because she has a different psychological make-up, I will be torqued.]"
So Cory, have you figured out which personality type that would make you? Just a rough guess, but I'm thinking maybe ENTJ ;^)
Bill,
It's a safe bet Cory is not an "I" I would guess ENFJ
I'm going to lean toward ENTJ... though I can see where LK might see Feeling replacing the Thinking. After all, if I were Thinking, wouldn't I have sought employment that pays better rather than doing what gives me such a great Feeling of satisfaction?
......oh ho! But this cheapo online survey scores me ENFJ! (slightly expressed extravert, moderately expressed intuitive personality, slightly expressed feeling personality, moderately expressed judging personality. Famous people of my type: Bill Clinton, Tony Blair, Clara Barton and [trumpets!] Ronald Reagan.)
Bill:
Per usual, you are missing the points in order to make an attack on someone. But i can take it, so enjoy yourself.
Work as a teacher? Maybe some day. I studied to teach history but changed course (literally) and am glad I did so. And frankly, some of the dullest-witted people I met at SDSU were the future teachers I was surrounded by in class. Sorry, but that's my view.
We are "lucky" to work at newspapers, not "foolish." It's a great job.
I am not whining about money and, as i said, people in this business don't fixate on the topic.
Educators do, and not just in this blog. It's a constant theme.
That is all I wrote and believe. I admire most educators but they should keep the noise down on pay and benefits. They are doing fine, I feel, and their lobbying efforts nationally and in statehouses, show how important it is to them. I do not hear such concerns for student achievement as I do for pay and retirement.
Peace to you, big bubba. I'm outta here.
Pope: ethics have been compromised.
http://www.mitchellrepublic.com/event/article/id/56001/
[CAH: I was about to nuke this comment.. but then I read this passage: "The economy doesn't function with market self-regulation but needs an ethical reason to work for mankind," {Pope Benedict XVI} told reporters traveling aboard the papal plane. "Man must be at the center of the economy, and the economy cannot be measured only by maximization of profit but rather according to the common good." Is that what you're getting at, Larry? Are you saying the great public school teachers are doing the Pope's work?]
Redeemer complex. He's on our side in some twisted New World Order: imagine that.
when you post in the margins i can miss your comments, CAH.
Am I hearing class envy for teachers? Who'd have thunk.
I think it shows us two things. 1) There is a lack of respect for teachers and 2) We really don't like it when we perceive others having something better than what we have.
So instead of cheering for everyone to get ahead and succeed, we kind of like tearing people down.
If you are a public servant it's sack cloth and gruel for you. You are lucky you have a job and that we pay you, and your degrees, a little over the poverty line. So shut up and get back to work...what part of servant didn't you understand in the title public servant?
What's the old saying. "We can handle hardship and adversity just fine, it's success we don't deal with so well." For goodness sake, we are even lowering the bar on what counts as success.
Tom -- Yeah, we're doing fine!!! At least 40% of the teachers in my school district have part-time jobs in addition to full-time teaching jobs with extra-curricular activities. Some do because of student loans--but some must because they don't make enough to support their family with just the teaching job.
Oh, I got your point, Tom. You don't think teachers work very hard for the amount of money they make and don't like to see them complaining. You made that quite clear. And you think a lot of them are lazy and inept.
I don't have a reading problem, but you sure seem to have a memory problem. Here's what you wrote:
"Spare me the violins for these folks. I am happy for their comfortable lives, but wish they would cease the moaning and complaining.
They’re fine, really. And the lazy, inept ones, and there are many — far, far too many — get the same pay and benefits."
As to not hearing teachers talk about student achievement--that is because we are doing well on the student achievement front. And thanks to all the classroom teachers who work over and beyond work days and during their summers vacations???? to make sure this remains true!
@SoDakDems: So much for free-market principles... RT @BlackHillsFOX Daugaard says he won't pursue health insurance exchange
Tom,
What made you change your mind about becoming a teacher? You couldn't pay me enough to be a newspaper editor. Sounds kind of boring.
With all the teacher bashing by a person in a dying profession (newpaper editing) maybe we need a bit of reality. I mean, really, isn't being employed by a newspaper sort of like being employed by a buggy maker in the 1910s. Teaching, at least, is a profession that will always be needed.
Teachers in one Pennsylvania school district are going to work despite the fact that they won't be getting paychecks. Interesting that the politicians want to argue about nonsense, while they let America decay, but teachers just keep on doing their job. Recall them all.
http://neatoday.org/2012/01/11/educators-will-work-without-pay-to-keep-broke-district-from-failing/
Lots of interesting points....
I'm fusing a couple things Troy and LK said above, on motivation and punishment. If extrinsic motivation is a real factor, then shouldn't we try giving it to everyone? Sec. Schopp seems to think we already have a bunch of intrinsically motivated people at the top, so the bonus will have no effect on that portion of the top 20%. Maybe we get more bang for the buck by giving bonuses to the bottom 20%!
Of course, that wouldn't be fair, giving them extra money to get from them the same effort that we're already getting from the top 20%, so fairness requires that we give that same bonus to the top 20%, not as motivation, but as just reward.
And if we're going to pay the bottom to motivate and the top to reward, then we might as well pay the middle. And suddenly we find a market case and a moral case for simply raising teacher pay across the board. Giving bonuses to one out of five teachers to motivate all five to work harder is a cheat, getting something for nothing from the other four. If we are truly market-based and moral, we create a system where every teacher who completes certain tasks and meets certain benchmarks (based on serious research on effectiveness and a serious discussion of our values as a school and state) gets the bonus. Everybody can get it for producing the desired educational results.
That's not some namby-pamby middle-school "Everyone's special! Everyone gets a sticker!" system. That's the same merit system I use in my classroom. You complete these assignments on time, you answer this many test questions correctly, you get an A. You don't, you get an F. Everyone who earns an A can get an A.
Same for teachers: you perform to standards, you get the pay. You don't perform, you don't get the pay—i.e., we fire you and find someone who will perform.
Now someone tell me how that system is less effective than the system the Governor proposes.
"In a competitive society, where men struggle with one another for food and shelter, what is more natural than that generosity, when it diminishes the food and shelter of men other than he who is generous, should be held an accursed thing? Wise old saws to the contrary, he who takes from a man's purse takes from his existence. To strike at a man's food and shelter is to strike at his life; and in a society organized on a tooth-and-nail basis, such an act, performed though it may be under the guise of generosity, is none the less menacing and terrible." — Jack London
See also the definition of a "scab.":
"After God had finished the rattlesnake, the toad, and the vampire, he had some awful substance left with which he made a scab. A scab is a two-legged animal with a corkscrew soul, a water brain, a combination backbone of jelly and glue. Where others have hearts, he carries a tumor of rotten principles. When a scab comes down the street, men turn their backs and Angels weep in Heaven, and the Devil shuts the gates of hell to keep him out...."
@PsychToday: Ideas of fair pay.
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/youre-hired/201201/getting-paid-what-you-re-worth
A none education example of merit pay gone wrong. John Deere is giving it's chief executive a $6 million bonus making his compensation something like $12 million.
My guess is that the current grain prices have more to do with John Deere equipment sales than anything any executive ever did beyond setting outrageous prices for the equipment.
Designing rational bonus and merit pay systems is difficult for business. It is probably more difficult for teaching and similar tasks. Relying on evaluation by administrators can produce absurd results. Not necessarily because administrators are corrupt, but because our minds separated from analysis checklists can produce all kinds of analysis failures.
Cory, have you heard of the 80/20 rule?
For business, 20% of your customers will bring in 80% of your sales. It works for almost everything.
It is also known as the Pareto Principle.
Yeah, I've heard of Pareto. It applies to blog comments and other forms of online participation. It's nice to say it applies to almost everything, but if you want to use Pareto to justify Daugaard's plan, you have to show me (1) empirical data showing that 20% of teachers really do add 80% of the value in K-12 education, and (2) empirical data that merit bonuses to that 20% will actually improve their performance. Daugaard's whole thesis is that we can't spend more money if it doesn't produce better results. A fallacy lies therein, but if we accept his thinking, his own Secretary Schopp said above that those top performers are already giving their all and that their level of performance probably won't change even with bonuses. If Schopp is right, then Daugaard would have to say no to his own plan, as the extra money wouldn't produce different results.
Troy,
I posted a couple of more thoughts about merit pay here
http://thedisplacedplainsman.blogspot.com/2012/01/daugaard-vangard-of-old-guard.html
Cory,
I will credit the perceiving part of my INTP personality with the ability to correctly predict your Meyers Briggs type.
As always, feel free to delete my posts that link to my blog