Public School Teachers - Performance Pay (2 Viewers)

[loquasagacious]

In a league of their own
July 12, 2009

Public school teachers are on a good wicket and closer scrutiny would expose the bad ones, writes Lisa Carty.

School league tables should be the least of Barry O'Farrell's public education concerns if he is elected in 2011.

Admittedly, the Opposition made a mess of communicating its message - which is essentially that information about school performance is already available and simplistic tables would not tell us anything we don't already know, while causing children a lot of grief in the meantime.

But being rated and ranked and reviewed is part of life and if it is done fairly, it shouldn't be anything to worry about.

In fact, it would be a good thing if an incoming Coalition government decided to subject public school teachers to a rigorous system of rating and ranking and reviewing that made it easier to reward the good ones and toss out the bad ones.

Is there a group of workers that has it as good as public school teachers?
They have a job for life, unless they commit heinous offences, and their annual leave is simply over the top.

They are at the start of their seventh week off this year and it's only July.
By the time Santa slips down the chimney, they will have chalked up 12 weeks' annual leave, three times the standard for most workers.

They've had public holidays off and rarely had their weekends interrupted. While the most diligent involve themselves in after-school activity, and/or spend part of their evenings marking or preparing lessons, most of them simply clock off.

Unlike other workers, they are almost always able to look after their own kids after school, which means they can have the luxury of being active participants in their children's after-school activities.

They can get home earlier in winter to get the bins in, empty the letterbox, get the washing off the line before it gets wet again, and supervise their own children's homework.

Because they can be at home with their school-aged children in the afternoon, they are able to offer a much smoother and more consistent routine than other parents in full-time employment who have to do the dash from work to after-school care.

They don't have to pay for someone to care for their children between the end of the school day and the end of the grown-up working day.

They don't have the intense stress and expense associated with arranging school-holiday care or the intense sense of loss that can come with not being able to take time off with your children.

Of course, private school teachers have these same benefits but in their last round of wage negotiations they had the good sense and good grace to agree to move their in-service courses, covering things like first aid, to the holidays, thereby lessening the impact on their students.

In return, there were pay rises for the best teachers.

Many private school libraries are open to year 12 students these holidays with staff rostered on to supervise and assist.

And many, if not most, private school teachers return to school several days before their pupils - up to a week earlier in January - to make sure they are "ready to roll when the girls arrive", as one put it this week.

Plus, in general, they are at school longer each day, with many offering tutoring from 7.30am or earlier.

Public school teachers, who earn almost $57,000 in their first year, need to realise their conditions are out of whack with the real world.

Great teachers are invaluable but, sadly, rare. Too many of them are just slack, content to do the bare minimum. That makes them a bad example for our children.

For the record, I attended public schools for 12 of my 13 years of schooling. I attended a private school in year 7 after winning a scholarship.

My children attended a great public primary school and both attended private high schools, with the exception of year 7 when my son went to the local public high school.

At the welcome barbecue for year 7 and parents, a teacher in boardshorts bragged about rorting sick leave.

Who wants that example set for their children?

Great teachers do a fantastic job. But so do many other workers, and they don't get 12 weeks' holiday.

Most taxpayers would be happy to see the good ones get more pay but the excessive leave is hard to swallow.

In a league of their own

It's been a while since I was in school but I do tend to agree that being a pubolic school teacher is a pretty good deal; short days, long holidays, etc. In my opinion this tended to make the Teachers Federation quite interesting, here was one of the most militant unions protecting one of the cushiest jobs.

Certainly being a teacher isn't all great but there do seem to be some pretty big advantages in there.

Would the publication of school league tables and the introduction of performance-based pay (and firing) improve the quality of teaching being provided in schools?

 

[katie tully]

a. You get 12 weeks paid holidays on top of another 4 weeks allocated annual leave.
b. Starting wage for a teacher is $57,000. Starting wage

I think we can all probably count on one hand how many truly remarkable teachers we had. The rest were simply there because they weren't remarkable at any other profession, and it showed. And their resentment showed in their attitudes towards students and teaching.

Given some public schools have a shit atmosphere, this isn't going to be fixed by throwing $100k at a select 100 teachers (if anyone saw the news yesterday, the introduction of the 'Superteacher').

It angers me beyond words, tbh, next teacher I see complaining about their job gets a punch in the face.

 

[loquasagacious]

1. Get degree in anything from anywhere with any marks
2. Fail to find employment
3. Do 1 year Dip Ed
4. Guaranteed work as teacher for $57K and 16 weeks holiday

 

[katie tully]

1. Get degree in anything from anywhere with any marks
2. Fail to find employment
3. Do 1 year Dip Ed
4. Guaranteed work as teacher for $57K and 16 weeks holiday

KJFIW(^WF(HDFW(TF

Chick I know did interior design, graduated in 02 or something. Effed around for a few years because they couldn't get employment in the field, did a dip ed last year and is now head of 7/8 arts faculty at a school in Canberra. All I hear is 'woe, I have to spend a few nights a term marking exams

You know what, there needs to be incentive to encourage intelligent people, leaders in their field, to contemplate teaching. As far as I'm concerned, the standards of teaching in public schools is poor. A chick I went to school with will take 6 years to do a 4 year education degree because she failed a shitload of subjects, but when she does finish she is going to be responsible for the learning of kids. She doesn't want to be a teacher because she has a passion, it's because it's an easy job with a shitload of perks and I think it's fairly indicative of a lot of teachers.

I think that teaching students should be put through more rigorous testing and like uni lecturers, I think that high school science teachers/maths teachers whatever should be required to submit work once a year or once every few years, a research paper maybe, to ensure they're still up to date with the field.

 

[loquasagacious]

Also some quick maths:

52 weeks less 16 weeks holidays = 36
$57,000 salary divided 36 weeks actually worked = $1583.33
Normal weeks worked = 48
48 weeks multiplied by $1583.33 = $76,000

So an effective graduate salary of $76,000, who else can hope for that?

Note: whilst the calculations above assume that teachers do no work at all during school holidays it is probably reasonable to assume that they do some however this would seem to be more than offset in the calculations because they ignore the difference in hours worked per day. E.g. a normal working week is 37.5 hours (or 48 for male managers) however school hours equate to more like 27.5. So lets assume that the holiday and out of class work equates to an average of 10 extra hours a week.

 

[katie tully]

I was looking at how much lecturers at CSU get paid. I think associate lecturers get $55-75k depending on experience and qualifications. Senior lecturers get around 90-100k. I then look at the uni structure of CSU ... My course coordinator teaches around 3-4 subjects a semester, with anywhere from 40-120 kids per subject, as well as being responsible for all students enrolled in my degree.

They don't get the same amount of holidays as teachers, they definitely don't get 12 weeks, because often when we're on uni holidays, the lecturers are still at the uni (prep, research, idk)

So really, they're not getting paid a considerably larger amount of money given the higher workload. Which is my main beef with the general teaching public.

 

[mcflystargirl]

I think reviewing teachers is a terrific idea but not for the sake of pay but to improve the teaching skills that they have and to rectify any things that they may do wrong.
I found at school, all the good teachers did not go home straight after school finish they stayed back preparing lessons, helping students and what not.

what else do you want teachers to do whilst the Kids are on holidays?? it makes sense for them to also be on holidays. Some of the crap teachers go through on a daily basis they could use the holidays

 

[loquasagacious]

KJFIW(^WF(HDFW(TF

Chick I know did interior design, graduated in 02 or something. Effed around for a few years because they couldn't get employment in the field, did a dip ed last year and is now head of 7/8 arts faculty at a school in Canberra. All I hear is 'woe, I have to spend a few nights a term marking exams

You know what, there needs to be incentive to encourage intelligent people, leaders in their field, to contemplate teaching. As far as I'm concerned, the standards of teaching in public schools is poor. A chick I went to school with will take 6 years to do a 4 year education degree because she failed a shitload of subjects, but when she does finish she is going to be responsible for the learning of kids. She doesn't want to be a teacher because she has a passion, it's because it's an easy job with a shitload of perks and I think it's fairly indicative of a lot of teachers.

I think that teaching students should be put through more rigorous testing and like uni lecturers, I think that high school science teachers/maths teachers whatever should be required to submit work once a year or once every few years, a research paper maybe, to ensure they're still up to date with the field.

One of my ex girlfriends started in Arts/Law, fucked around, dropped law because it was all to hard, finished a history degree, didn't get a job in any of the public service graduate programs (not even the really shit ones like Veteran's Affairs that no one applies for), and is now doing a Dip Ed will finish end of the year and start teaching.

 

[mcflystargirl]

One of my ex girlfriends started in Arts/Law, fucked around, dropped law because it was all to hard, finished a history degree, didn't get a job in any of the public service graduate programs (not even the really shit ones like Veteran's Affairs that no one applies for), and is now doing a Dip Ed will finish end of the year and start teaching.

It annoys me when people do it as a last resort.

 

[katie tully]

I think reviewing teachers is a terrific idea but not for the sake of pay but to improve the teaching skills that they have and to rectify any things that they may do wrong.
I found at school, all the good teachers did not go home straight after school finish they stayed back preparing lessons, helping students and what not.

what else do you want teachers to do whilst the Kids are on holidays?? it makes sense for them to also be on holidays. Some of the crap teachers go through on a daily basis they could use the holidays

Reviewing teacher performance is fine. Matching this review with a pay increase is not fine.

If we're going to review teacher performance, and if they really want more pay, I think they should have to start accounting for some of their time. Maybe introduce a set number of hours each day after school - i.e. all teachers must stay until 4:30 to do prep/mark/whatever.

I also think there needs to be periodic testing of literacy and numeracy skills, because I can't count how many teachers I've had over the years who were dismal at writing their own names. I also like my idea of making the secondary teachers submit research. It doesn't have to be first hand, maybe they can write a literature review on a chosen topic once every 2 years or something.

Why does it make sense for them to be on holidays? No other profession gets allocated holidays to fit in with the school semester?

 

[katie tully]

One of my ex girlfriends started in Arts/Law, fucked around, dropped law because it was all to hard, finished a history degree, didn't get a job in any of the public service graduate programs (not even the really shit ones like Veteran's Affairs that no one applies for), and is now doing a Dip Ed will finish end of the year and start teaching.

Yes but perhaps this is the reason for the axing of the dip ed?

 

[loquasagacious]

I think reviewing teachers is a terrific idea but not for the sake of pay but to improve the teaching skills that they have and to rectify any things that they may do wrong.
I found at school, all the good teachers did not go home straight after school finish they stayed back preparing lessons, helping students and what not.

what else do you want teachers to do whilst the Kids are on holidays?? it makes sense for them to also be on holidays. Some of the crap teachers go through on a daily basis they could use the holidays

Preparing lesson plans, grading assignments, preparing assignments, staying abreast of the field (how many kids are still being taught that Pluto is a planet?).

Ultimately though you're right that there isn't twelve weeks of work available. So the message to take away is that when negotiating pay teachers will tell you that they are underpaid for full-time work - but that's not what they are really doing. If working full-time they would be being paid $76K (generous imo). But they aren't so they're not.

And it's not a topic for this thread but I have a strong attraction to more intensive schooling models. e.g. 7.5hours a day of lessons and only 4 weeks of holidays a year.

 

[mcflystargirl]

Reviewing teacher performance is fine. Matching this review with a pay increase is not fine.

If we're going to review teacher performance, and if they really want more pay, I think they should have to start accounting for some of their time. Maybe introduce a set number of hours each day after school - i.e. all teachers must stay until 4:30 to do prep/mark/whatever.

I also think there needs to be periodic testing of literacy and numeracy skills, because I can't count how many teachers I've had over the years who were dismal at writing their own names. I also like my idea of making the secondary teachers submit research. It doesn't have to be first hand, maybe they can write a literature review on a chosen topic once every 2 years or something.

Why does it make sense for them to be on holidays? No other profession gets allocated holidays to fit in with the school semester?

I think the uni's should be checking this too, i know at uni I had some friends get pulled up because of poor spelling, and told them to see the academic skills people before it becomes a major issue, and I know at uni we all got told to ensure our maths skills were up to scratch, because when we teach we need know how to do this. which makes perfect sense.

The paper ideas is a great idea it just would need to be adapted according to the subject.

 

[mcflystargirl]

Preparing lesson plans, grading assignments, preparing assignments, staying abreast of the field (how many kids are still being taught that Pluto is a planet?).

Ultimately though you're right that there isn't twelve weeks of work available. So the message to take away is that when negotiating pay teachers will tell you that they are underpaid for full-time work - but that's not what they are really doing. If working full-time they would be being paid $76K (generous imo). But they aren't so they're not.

And it's not a topic for this thread but I have a strong attraction to more intensive schooling models. e.g. 7.5hours a day of lessons and only 4 weeks of holidays a year.

I think the current holidays is a good thing, not from a future teachers perspective but from someone who did there HSC last year, i think i would of gone insane if i did not have a decent break every 10 weeks, it is a chance to take some stress off, relax and re-focus before getting back into it.

 

[loquasagacious]

Reviewing teacher performance is fine. Matching this review with a pay increase is not fine.

If we're going to review teacher performance, and if they really want more pay, I think they should have to start accounting for some of their time. Maybe introduce a set number of hours each day after school - i.e. all teachers must stay until 4:30 to do prep/mark/whatever.

I also think there needs to be periodic testing of literacy and numeracy skills, because I can't count how many teachers I've had over the years who were dismal at writing their own names. I also like my idea of making the secondary teachers submit research. It doesn't have to be first hand, maybe they can write a literature review on a chosen topic once every 2 years or something.

Why does it make sense for them to be on holidays? No other profession gets allocated holidays to fit in with the school semester?

What's wrong with paying good teachers more and firing bad teachers? At least it would encourage good tecahing. Of course the sly way of doing it would be a risk-reward model, where the total salary remains similar - say $60K but now 10-15% is subject to risk-reward wherein it is paid only if performance targets are met.

I think billable hours and mandatory literature reviews/research papers are a great idea.

 

[Iruka]

Actually, the article is incorrect. Public school teachers at the moment start on $53K a year.

https://www.det.nsw.edu.au/media/downloads/employment/awardcon/schoolteach.pdf

You have to look at Schedule 1 on p28 or there abouts and see what a step 5 teacher (i.e., a 4 year trained teacher with no experience) gets paid. Approx $57K per year is what they will be getting in 2 years time, when the present award expires.

 

[mcflystargirl]

the only thing with reviewing teachers is how would it be done?? i know at school in years 10-12 i had at least 10 amazing teachers (the others were ok) but they had some students who did nothing, gave them crap and simply did not care, this continued right through to year 12, if there results were taken into account, then that would not look good for the teacher.

 

[katie tully]

What's wrong with paying good teachers more and firing bad teachers? At least it would encourage good tecahing. Of course the sly way of doing it would be a risk-reward model, where the total salary remains similar - say $60K but now 10-15% is subject to risk-reward wherein it is paid only if performance targets are met.

I think billable hours and mandatory literature reviews/research papers are a great idea.

Because ultimately you're going to have good teachers in shit schools. I had an amazing English teacher, who taught at a cunted school. If we were to look at the marks of my HSC cohort and use it as a reflection of her teaching, it would be inaccurate.

IMO, even pay for all teachers, but as you said, fire the shit ones. If they cannot pass yearly literacy or numeracy tests, or demonstrate ongoing learning (such as submitting research) then they don't deserve to be a teacher.

 

[Iruka]

Under the new NSW Institue of Teachers scheme, which applies to teachers employed after 2004, teachers are supposed to show that they are engaged in on-going learning.

The problem is that much of the Professional development on offer is crap that is run by ex-teachers who could never manage in the classroom and see this as an avenue of escape (aka, classroom refugees). So I don't think it really benefits anyone.

As for firing teachers, that just never happens.

 

[katie tully]

Under the new NSW Institue of Teachers scheme, which applies to teachers employed after 2004, teachers are supposed to show that they are engaged in on-going learning.

The problem is that much of the Professional development on offer is crap that is run by ex-teachers who could never manage in the classroom and see this as an avenue of escape (aka, classroom refugees). So I don't think it really benefits anyone.

As for firing teachers, that just never happens.

Well that's the thing.

One of the requirements of being a lecturer at university is demonstrated ongoing learning. This means research, getting published, applying for grants etc. I don't see why tertiary institutions should be any different to high schools in this regards. Going to a 2 day workshop where everybody sits around with coffee and discusses 'behaviour management' is not ongoing learning.