John Key should just say his new education management scheme IS performance pay instead of denial.
Lots - if not most - people are paid on performance. If they don't perform they don't get paid. When they perform well they get paid more, even if that requires initiative on their own behalf eg a change of employer. When I take a commission I am explicit that if the commissioner isn't satisfied, they won't buy the painting. Key's scheme tells teachers and principals that if they are a cut above, there is now a new opportunity to get paid better. Good job too.
What's wrong with performance pay anyway? What's with the drive to protect mediocrity? It can't be fair whatever way you approach it.
Dr Guy Hatchard: One Can’t Escape the Truth
14 minutes ago
3 comments:
It's a massive sop to the teacher unions - all of whom are ecstatic at all the extra money they'll be getting from more union fees. An extra billion dollars and not one more teacher in front of a class. Not one - just an extra billion split between then NZEI, PPTA & Principals' unions.
I guess Hekia just decided completely surrendering to the teacher unions was easier than any real reforms in an election year. The result is yet
another of Key's policies that is so far left that even Helen didn't have the guts to bring it in.
When you think about even the most obvious alternatives - bulk funding schools & ending the Novopay debacle - or actual right wing solutions - just privatising every state school - this is pathetic.
I find this far more than just performance pay.
I am all for performance pay, but this new program means that high performing teachers are having to do extra work for their money and are sharing their methods for success with other teachers.
Sharing their methods of success is the whole point. Whether they are 'shareable' is another matter.
Post a Comment