Teachers’ and Students’ Performance
The purpose of this essay is to ascertain that teachers should not be evaluated and compensated based on their students’ performance on standardized test. The essay will give reasons concerning this case.
Teachers as well as schools are accountable for standardized testing. There are a number of benefits associated with these tests including the responsibility which is bestowed on teachers when teaching students the required syllabus (Springer, 2010). Teachers work hard as they expect to be rewarded when this task is accomplished. Nevertheless, there are many challenges associated with this system of evaluation (Gratz, 2009). Several schools such as Seattle and Garfield High Schools boycotted against these standardized tests (Goodman & Turner, 2010). Their argument is that the tests are flawed. In addition, there is no seriousness among students when undertaking these tests.
Many teachers feel that this is a way of administrators to evaluate teachers’ work, though this is not the original purpose. These tests were initially meant to motivate teachers, but there is the misuse of that purpose (Glazerman, 2010). There was a national outcry to have these tests removed. The exercise involves paying teachers on the basis of their students’ performance. In the USA, many instances of rewarding teachers on this basis exist. According to researchers, there is the likelihood of damage done to the educational system instead of its enhancement (Goodman & Turner, 2010). According to one of the analyses, this system is politically-oriented, but not educationally. Performance pay effects are bound to bring damage to schools.. Currently, schools are suffering from the greatest attrition rates of teachers (Springer, 2010).
Standardized testing is in close interrelation with performance pay. Rewarding teachers on the basis of standardized tests will also lead to the increase of interest in standardized testing. Therefore, educational costs are bound to increase as more money will be invested in preparation as well as paying the teachers who perform better (Gratz, 2009). A good example is North Carolina and Charlotte where $21 billion were spent on the system of performance pay. This money was invested on designing as well as administering over 50 standardized exams which were new. This led to the increase in overall school budgets. Currently, there is considerable anxiety when it comes to test taking, and this is bound to intensify with the introduction of this system.
Teachers are also under pressure as they have to ensure that learning process is focused on appropriate gaining of skills, as well as content cover of these tests. It is evident that versed teachers will be not attracted by the performance pay due to the fact there is no direct improvement of instructions by the system (Springer, 2010). There is likelihood that talented teachers will have to leave their teaching profession. Many studies have shown that what matters the most in teaching profession is not money but rather working conditions (Gratz, 2009). Many teachers prefer working in environment that is supportive, where they are able to be more creative when collaborating with their colleague teachers instead of competing against them (Goodman & Turner, 2010).
Management cost is also bound to be reduced as in the absence of these tests there will be no extra responsibilities https://123helpme.org/articles/buy-coursework-help/ In a situation where some teachers are paid more than others due to high performance of their students, there are doubts about the fairness of the system (Glazerman, 2010). Due to this factor, many teachers will deviate from teaching in favor of other professions. In addition, there is increased pressure on results of the tests. According to Jeffrey Pfeiffer, a professor at Stanford School of Business, there are several myths of evaluation as well as compensation of teachers based on how students perform on the standardized tests. Among these myths is that there is absorption of time meant for management as well as resources.
This system is actually associated with a decrease in task performance that necessitates both innovation as well as creativity (Gratz, 2009). Many teachers are not in favor of this system. Majority of teachers do not like this system but have other preferences such as a reduction of a class size (Goodman & Turner, 2010). In Finland, for example, there are a number of recommendations made on how the performance of students academically can be improved, and they included boosting the salaries of teachers, class size reduction as well elimination of standardized tests (Gratz, 2009). Today, teaching is one of the best professions in Finland that follows the implementation of these recommendations (Springer, 2010).
The only way to improve teaching is when teachers’ salaries are not interrelated with the use of standardized tests (Goodman & Turner, 2010). In addition, there should be availability of such teaching tools as small classes, collaboration with other teachers as well as time planning. Consequently, there will be more creativity among teachers, which will help them to address various challenges such as low salaries and absence of their own housing (Gratz, 2009).
In conclusion, various robust measures should be used for teachers’ evaluation. In addition, there should be an input from both students as well as parents when it comes to the identification of weaknesses (Gratz, 2009). Through this, teachers’ practice will improve. Moreover, this system will allow weeding out those who are not qualified in teaching profession. Community members as well as parents should make an emphasis on the evaluation system which is fair as well as task-oriented. Finally, they should insist on taking measures that are likely to help teachers succeed in their careers (Glazerman, 2010).
