For those of you that always want to compare education to other professions, please consider that public schools must take all children...doesn't matter what level they are at. In industry, if you get materials that are substandard, you can return it for better materials. Can schools do that? I have a child that receives special education services, and I am thankful for all that his teachers do for him! (He is not in the Janesville schools) I am happy to hear that Wisconsin will start to phase out the WKCE test over the next few years. That test is awful!! (I have seen it and it is bad) Another concern about merit pay is how would teachers that teach elective courses be judged? Just remember....schools are not an assembly line.

Professor: I had to almost chuckle at your posting. I have worked in the private sector for more than 30 years and it seems every evaluation I have received has been formed by the criteria you list. I also know for a fact that many of my bosses have decided on a percentage increase first and then fit the evaluation to that figure. Most workers can see through that method and find it to be insulting. Hopefully, teachers won't have to suffer the same injustice as the rest of us.

Please do an investigation on state tests!
Some questions may include:
*how do you define achievement;
*what is a formative/summative assessment;
* how do teachers use formative assessments;
*how/why do educators collaborate; will they with Race to the Top;
*how are test questions chosen and created;
*how are the tests scored;
*who scores the tests;
*what are their qualifications/pay;
*are companies making money from the tests;
*how much do they lobby for their tests;
*how much do these companies contribute to political campaigns;
*how valid are the test questions;
*how are they biased;
*do the tests create the curriculum;
*do the tests inform instruction;
*what exactly do these tests measure;
*define reading; how does the test define reading;
*define writing; how does the test define writing;
*is there corruption associated with these tests; where does the money trail lead:
*how many weeks are kids tested;
*what time of year do the tests place;
*do universities support state tests;
*do trades support state tests;
*are students happy going to school when their curriculum is test preparation;
*how many schools have a library/how is the library staffed;
* how many students have art;
* how many students have music?

And, unfortunately, it doesn't just happen at schools, either....there seems to be a lot of examples these days of administrators losing degrees of common sense, maturity and other leadership attributes that were once very common.

I agree with the Professor, it would be hard to do. Not that it should not be done. It really is to bad that politics has become such a big part of daily lives at our schools. Teachers play favorites so I guess we really should not expect administration not to.

Subjective evaluations of teachers will always be open to 'office politics', who likes you and who doesn't, and other kinds of similar inequities (everything from your boss being intimidated by your education/experience to petty things as simple as being the victim of 'short-man's syndrome). Objective evaluations have their problems as well, like, "Gee, Fred, kinda sucks to be you; this year the cut off for merit increases was set at 63 points, and you only got 62." Or, "Honest, Carol, you were supposed to receive your merit increase, but, as it turned out, we ran out of money sooner than we had calculated. But we do want you to have this certificate of appreciation." Let alone coming up with realistic, measurable objective standards for evaluations in the first place. I just don't think it can be done. I completely disagree that a tenured faculty member can't be fired. It may not be immediate (which is good), but with proper documentation, it can happen.

There has to be some way to 'grade' the teachers. It can not all be test based it needs to be from the entire picture. Schools should not get any federal funding if they can not prove their results. That is why the ' No child left behind ' test was created to many schools and teachers graduating students who could not read or write. They did it to themselves.

I think we are unwilling to pay for or admit to the real issues. I would be all for teacher compensation tied to test scores if:

1) Student abilities were defined early, with special attention tied to where a student is today and in a joint decision with parents where the realistic end point should be.

2) If kids with specific needs could be addressed individually, which is highly unlikely.

3) Where families didnt require two incomes to keep up with the bills, that obviously they created by living beyond their bounds.

4) Where all valued the educational value from the system and therefore, when additional taxes are required, people are willing to contribute as they see the real value in the system.

Unfortunately -- forcing the solution on any one group seems very unfair and likely to be doomed. It takes, parents, teachers and our society to see the value in our educational system.

Private schools seem to be able to achieve that goal. Public schools and entitlements seem to drive that goal out of the public systems.

I just picked up my son's math textbook yesterday (which his teacher kindly walked me through, as the subject's a challenge for him) and the first 43 pages of this text is devoted to preparing for the WKCE! Ridiculous. I want him to learn math concepts, not spend his time studying for a multiple choice test. Seeing that he doesn't perform great on bubble tests (although he gets As and Bs on his classroom tests), I wouldn't want his teachers evaluated on the meaningless state test. You'll never convince me it paints an accurate picture of what my son really knows.

No Child Left Untested is the WORST thing to ever happen to our education system. Teachers now teach to the test. Failing to bring in as many out of the box learning activities and world offerings as they used to, as they are fearful their students will be low score earners, putting THEIR jobs at risk. So the lesson plans are written based upon what is on the standardized tests. Way to dumb down America. This just makes a college education THAT MUCH more important in understanding the world around you.
There is indisputable evidence that students scores are based on socio-economic factors, parent education levels, home environments, sibling numbers, parent work/life values... It goes on. Please spare me that a child straight out of the 'hood with a mom who peddles meth after hours to feed her children has the likelihood of scoring the same grades or test results as a child whose mom is a stay-at-home soccer mom with a father who works 9-5 and coaches that soccer team. THIS is what teachers have to contend with daily. Testing is a HORRIBLE way of weeding the good from the bad. Just horrible. There's a lot more than a test to grade a teacher.

All you need to do is look at other states that control state educational funding tied to state issued testing to see this is a bad idea. It causes school districts to soften grading requirements and results in students being less prepared for college. Having the teacher's individual salary tied to these test results is even more dangerous. Teachers will then only teach what is on the test itself.

"The business community makes no distinction between education and training" (Gerald Bracey)

" … schools need to broaden curriculum options rather than stiffen traditional requirements" (Susan Ohanian)

Those for whom classroom visits are occasional photo opportunities are most likely to be big fans of testing .. (A Kohn)

Repeal No Child Left Behind!
Democracy isn't a business. ~Malcolm Forbes~

Do policemen and firemen get paid according to "results"? Do police get merit pay for reducing crime in their given routes? Do firemen get merit pay for saving a house from a certain percentage of destruction? Just curious if anyone knows how these other service professions are using merit-based pay...

the biggest thing is this and i believe this is only a part of compensation. But in every other walk of life compensation is tied to results. If you don't produce, you don't get a raise and possibly lose your job. Why should teacher's be protected? Because of a union????
.
The test results should be part of an overall scale to determine compensation along with fellow teacher survey, administration surveys, parents surveys, and students survey. I think that would be fair.

why all the "reinventing the wheel" ideas here? Dont we have 47 other states plans to compare from? the articles I've read only show WI, CA & NV as even having this restriction in place for teachers wages. Couldn't we just use the other states plans as a model to answer all these questions. I'm sure some of them might not work (with the WEAC)but atleast its a starting point rather than just simply saying it wont work.

What a horrible idea!
.
I would guess some of the worst teachers would excel at that. It doesn't take a genius, or good teacher, to teach to a standardized test.
.
The test is a problem and I don't want to be forced to teach to a bad test.

1. What do you do about the teachers whose subjects are not tested? 2. The test is taken in October and we get the results in April how effective is that? 3. The students don't see any value in the tests they aren't even graded on it so some do not take it seriously. 4. What about the teachers teaching Adavanced classes or Talent and Gifted Classes?

These state tests are geared to average to above average students. So, dock a teacher's performance and pay because there's special ed students that are mainstreamed?

I favor revamping teachers pay by linking it to their performance -- graduation rates, test scores, attendance, academic achievements of their students (not of the teachers!), etc. I also favor extension of the school year so that our kids get about 47 weeks of schooling. With the school year extension I'd favor compensating the teachers more for working nearly a whole year.

We have too many laws, too much bureaucracy. How about getting rid of the Department of Education and federal involvement in a local matter? Don't hear the Republicans, who championed that idea in the 80s, talk about that much anymore.

Test scores matter. How about linking performance evaluations to parental satisfaction? Most professionals are evaluated based on customer satisfaction.

I have seen numerous times where people say "I would like the test scores to be just one of multiple factors that determine a teacher's compensation." Yet I never see any suggestions of what the other factors are or how much test scores matter.

teaching for life wins, teaching for test fails.. will some teachers brand lower kids "failures" get rid of them to help thier scores?

On the flip side of the impulsive and perhaps "angry" teen is the teen (or child) who may feel too much responsibility with this. My nephew has a learning disability and doesn't test well (even with modifications), yet he truly connects with his teachers and would feel terrible that his poor test score might negatively impact something as important as his teachers' pay.

I can't imagine merit pay determined solely by a standardized test. In the business world, when an employee isn't following through, he/she is fired. Teachers don't get to fire a student when he/she does poorly. As a matter of fact, a teacher will work very hard to try a variety of methods to help a student and even then the student (and/or parent) doesn't always follow through on the plans made for his/her benefit. As for the comment about the students feeling as though they have the power to affect a teacher's pay by purposely bombing the test, this is probably frighteningly true. Teenagers are impulsive by nature and don't realize the consequences of their actions until it is often too late. Let's not put this kind of power in their laps and expect them to do the right thing all of the time; we just read an article last week about their driving habits on Milton Avenue during the weekends...

I voted no.

Also: skinnypuppy makes a scary and very accurate point.

Three teens gave me interesting yet scary insight into how their minds work: they thought it would be FUNNY to purposely do poorly on the standardized tests just so teachers do NOT get merit pay. As one said,"What a power trip! Cool!" and another one said she could use it over the teachers' heads when they try to bust her for texting during class. Scariest thing - they were not joking. Testing should not be the ONLY thing or even a LARGE part of a law basing teacher pay on student performance based on this kind of mentality. I'd never want my pay based on a hormonally challenged vindictive set of teens! :)

There is nothing wrong with wanting schools and learning to be more efficient. Testing is in fact a good idea of diagnosing and finding where there needs to be improvement. The problem is you are not going to get there by testing the students and then paying teachers according to the performance of the student.

There are plenty of great teachers out there, but from my own experience, a student is not going to ace every class. Not everyone is great at math or biology for example, yet they're required to take it. Teachers shouldn't be to blame for that.

nothing but excuses.blame everything on the home life.we were dirt poor at times,my folks were heavy drinkers,and sometimes there was nothing to eat.my dad was the hardest working man i ever seen and yet he was only my stepdad.but when the weekends came they drank.but i still managed to graduate high school and go to blackhawk tech.none of these problems were the teachers fault,the point im getting at is if you want to excel you will or you can go around and make excuses for everything that happens in your life,the only thing i dont like is when these teachers continually blame everything that happens on a childs homelife.my kids went to these schools and it wasnt the teachers fault for the things that happened it was their own.one thing i will say they have some of the sorriest principals ive ever met.so quit throwing the blame on teachers and family life,unless the child has a learing disability,its their own fault they dont do well in school.

*ratio

I voted No. When I was a jr. high student I had many problems pulling my grades up.It wasn't the teacher's fault I flunked the tests. I flunked because I didn't do the assignments and I rarely paid attention long enough to listen. Home life was tough, dealing with my parents divorce, moving for the first time, switching schools. Like many students these day. So many single parents working, it's difficult for kids to concentrate and do well in school. Especially when there is 30 kids in the class room and the textbooks are from 1989. These teachers should not be compensated for having the most high test scores (for a government mandated test) from their class. That's just like throwing a pizza party for the teacher whose class sells the most swiss colony products during the "Holiday Fundraiser". It's unfair because teachers don't get to pick and choose their students.It's a luck of the draw. Instead of giving a teacher a fat raise, why not use it to pay a new teacher's salary? Cut down the student/teacher ration a little and improve students chances of getting the individual attention they need for their different strengths and weaknesses.

Test scores as a sole or even major factor in assessing teachers is short sighted. There are many factors that affects a students score on any given test. Not all those factors can be attributed to teachers or overcome by even the best teachers. When the district hires a new principal there is a committee of administrators, teachers, peers (other principal) and parents. Each of those groups have a different perspective of what makes a good principal. The same is true with teachers. Add to the list students. As some students, especially high school students, have some great insights. Yes, test scores are an objective way to evaluate teachers and the easiest, but if you really want to reward the best, let's find a way to do it right.

no I didn't fool. Education starts in the home, any teacher will tell you that. Without home support it is difficult for students to succeed. Education 101.

You just made an argument for the irrelevance of teachers, ekim8404.

How can you tie teacher compensation to test scores when the main reasons a child excels or fails at school, is in large part, due to what happens in the home?

spkout; so your admitting there are "best" teachers & "worst" teachers. I thought the union said they were all equal - your not making the case for solidarity - again.

I think the test scores should be 1 of many criteria for the raises but not necessarily on a pass - fail scale either. How about devolopment / improvement. I have kids & understand that all kids learn at different levels & speeds. Why not measure progress rather than just setting artifical milestones that in reality are unattainable. If its tied ONLY to test scores - the Next thing you know teachers will be "recruiting" kids for their class just so they can get a raise next year.

spkout - What a wonderful educational world we would live in if EVERY student (not just special education students) would be evaluated and assessed for placement so that IF they were having difficulty they could be placed with the BEST teachers possible to ensure they had a successful learning experience. Unfortunately, I have not seen evidence of that in the Janesville School District.

I am part of the special education team at an elementary school. Each year, we look at the next year's placement of our special education students, (including a recent surge in students with autism). As you know, these students' scores are included in the WKCE testing.

In looking at placements for these kids we hand-pick the teachers we feel will be the most understanding, patient, and firm to deal with these students. We pick the BEST teachers and arrange for them to teach these kids. These children do notoriously poorly on WKCE testing. Right now, the best teachers receive the highest number of special education students in their homerooms.

There are a few teachers we avoid placing kids with because they neglect or deal poorly with the special ed students(especially those with autism) they get. These are among the WORST teachers, but if you look at the test scores of their students, they would come out looking better than the excellent teachers.

It is completely unfair to jeopardize the compensation of our BEST teachers because we are placing our most difficult students with them. But when it comes to deciding where to place a child, the child's overall welfare is more important to us than the teacher's compensation.

My answer is yes, but I would like the test scores to be just one of multiple factors that determine a teacher's compensation.