Hold your horses Steveu, see (http://steveu.com/blog) performance pay update) the jury is still out on the benefits of performance pay for teachers. Consequently, the Utah Foundation, didn't have "actual data" to conclude "that funding increases for public education don't produce improvement unless those increases are tied to performance pay incentives," as Steveu's researcher asserts. Oh, those pesky details
In the interest of full disclosure, I unsuccessfully ran against Rep. Urquhart in 2006. Starting as an outsider with virtually no name recognition and little money, while also contending with the fact that only 7 percent of the voters in Washington County are registered Democrats, I only garnered about 23 percent of the vote.
Pesky Utah Foundation details
Nevertheless, hold your horses Steveu, while the Utah Foundation reported that "Educational researchers generally find greater promise in alternative salary schedules that incorporate student achievement or demonstrable teaching skills into the determination of salary, . . . " But the Foundation also continued: "Such innovative salary systems are relatively new and utilized by relatively few states and districts, and the research on their effect on student achievement is therefore limited."
And the Foundation reported that study results suggest that states and districts should be implementing pilot programs, but that the current research cannot even begin to prescribe how the salary systems should be designed.
This is a far cry from providing actual data to conclude that funding increases for public education don’t produce improvement, unless those increases are tied to performance pay incentives for teachers as asserted.
Moreover, the Foundation's report segment headed Does Money Matter points out: "All researchers acknowledge that additional funding could make a difference."
The Foundation's report continues by noting that the existing research “shows clearly that . . . holding school district characteristics constant, a higher level of student performance requires higher spending per pupil.”
Again, the Utah Foundation didn't conclude that funding increases for public education don’t produce improvement unless those increases are tied to performance pay incentives. Why? Because the jury is still out on the benefits of performance pay for teachers. On the other hand, according to the Utah Foundation: "All researchers acknowledge that additional funding could make a difference."
Oh, those pesky details.
Don L. Miller
In the interest of full disclosure, I unsuccessfully ran against Rep. Urquhart in 2006. Starting as an outsider with virtually no name recognition and little money, while also contending with the fact that only 7 percent of the voters in Washington County are registered Democrats, I only garnered about 23 percent of the vote.
Pesky Utah Foundation details
Nevertheless, hold your horses Steveu, while the Utah Foundation reported that "Educational researchers generally find greater promise in alternative salary schedules that incorporate student achievement or demonstrable teaching skills into the determination of salary, . . . " But the Foundation also continued: "Such innovative salary systems are relatively new and utilized by relatively few states and districts, and the research on their effect on student achievement is therefore limited."
And the Foundation reported that study results suggest that states and districts should be implementing pilot programs, but that the current research cannot even begin to prescribe how the salary systems should be designed.
This is a far cry from providing actual data to conclude that funding increases for public education don’t produce improvement, unless those increases are tied to performance pay incentives for teachers as asserted.
Moreover, the Foundation's report segment headed Does Money Matter points out: "All researchers acknowledge that additional funding could make a difference."
The Foundation's report continues by noting that the existing research “shows clearly that . . . holding school district characteristics constant, a higher level of student performance requires higher spending per pupil.”
Again, the Utah Foundation didn't conclude that funding increases for public education don’t produce improvement unless those increases are tied to performance pay incentives. Why? Because the jury is still out on the benefits of performance pay for teachers. On the other hand, according to the Utah Foundation: "All researchers acknowledge that additional funding could make a difference."
Oh, those pesky details.
Don L. Miller
No comments:
Post a Comment