Some posts don’ t make me popular with either friends or opponents but I think it is about time to have a go at a couple of myths around the employment and payment of teachers.
First, John Roughan who bases his column on his father’s experience as a principal and thinks it is too hard to dismiss a teacher.
Competition for pupils would force principals to get rid of the odd staff member who should be doing something else and reward the rest at last with decent pay.”
Times have changed since then. I introduced training for first time principals and then principals more generally; expanded the Ministry contracts for principal advice; and funded the School Trustees Association’s employment advice stream for employers. Tolley has cut the vast majority of this.
Employment matters were an important part of all those streams of advice. Boards and principals have a much better understanding of their options with poor performers, including dismissal, than when John’s father was a principal and struggled with what they considered a hopeless task.
Modern assessment systems including NEMP and asTTle give clear evidence when students don’t make progress. Useful in the rare, contested cases.
And the NZEI has played a very positive role. They have for years wanted the regard in which teachers are held in society to be improved. They know that moving poorly performing teachers on is important to their professional and pay ambitions. They have paid a very positive role in the Teachers’ Council. They insist on proper process but have often been harder than others because of their knowledge of the harm a bad teacher can do – especially in a small primary school.
Because the process is so effective, bad teachers are now more likely to resign than be sacked. A small proportion do make it to other schools but that will stop when Tolley gets round to progressing the legislation requiring early notification that she stalled in the house in the middle of last year.
Secondly, there is a widespread impression that it is not possible to reward teachers based on their performance rather than merely on experience and qualifications.
As an aside, the best performing schooling system in the world (Finland) pay very, very well, require a Masters degree and only accept one in eight applicants. They don’t have a performance component but use a high trust professional model.
In New Zealand, we have a system called units, used in primary and secondary schools. They are worth $3k+ each. Added on a temporary or permanent basis to salary. From memory, the last pay round put 10k more units into primary schools. There aren’t any limits to the number a teacher can be allocated and the principal has discretion in their use. In good schools, good teachers get them.
So sorry to destroy a couple of myths. Bad teachers can be and are being fired. Good teachers are paid more.
Doesn’t stop Key and Tolley trying to use the arguments to promote their so-called standards. I think they probably should be in the group of 88% of parents who admit they don’t understand the standards system and how it is proposed to work according to yesterday’s Herald.
