Newly agree to contract: Details of the agreement include: annual base salary increases over three years of 3%, 2% and 4.5%; 30 minutes of recess for elementary students; new policies to reduce student testing; unlinking test scores to teacher evaluations; and increasing staff to reduce workloads and provide student services. WSJ 9-16-15
A teacher with a masters degree in Seattle earns $100,000 a year (for ten months of work). Based on the above raises that will be $109,787 by the end of the contract or the full-time equivalent of $131,797; not bad.
Teachers get paid more for obtaining a masters degree without regard to the actual added value that degree adds to their teaching ability and results in the classroom. How would you like that automatic pay raise deal?
In this case it’s supposed to be a good thing to reduce testing and unlink test scores to evaluations … and this is supposed to be better for students?
Students get stressed unnecessarily when teachers and the system teach to the tests and put pressure on the students to do well. The upcoming test is hyped, the kids think it’s a crisis if they don’t do well. That’s not fair.
If you are doing your job well, doesn’t it stand to reason that cramming students for a standard test should be unnecessary? They will have learned what was taught. I recall the dreaded pop quiz while in school; unfair we would complain, but in retrospect if both teacher and student were doing their job, pop or any other quiz is irrelevant, the material has been learned primarily because it has been well taught.
We can’t agree on testing in elementary school and teachers don’t like being evaluated based on any quantifiable standard, but a student’s entire future can be based on cramming for the SAT and its impact on being accepted at a top college. What the hell is relevant and what’s not?
Categories: Observations on life