Zach Eisen Photo Editor As education reform is debat- ed across the nation, the issue of whether or not to pay teachers ac- cording to their students’ achieve- ment on standardized tests is a frequent topic of discussion. The initiative, known as mer- it pay, has been debated for years and has even been endorsed by President Obama. However, basing teachers’ salaries on test results is not a fair measure of the work they put in. Introducing merit pay to our school system will also increase the emphasis placed on standard- ized testing in the classroom. Teachers have increasingly stressed the importance of stan- dardized testing over the last decade, mainly due to the No Child Left Behind Act. Passed in 2001, the No Child Left Behind Act uses standardized testing in primary and secondary schools across the nation as a measure for determining whether or not individual schools are meeting state requirements. If schools fail to reach these standards, their national funding will be cut, potentially leading to more problems. As the fear of losing funding spreads through school districts across the country, schools have been placing more emphasis on standardized testing. In Con- necticut, for example, freshmen and sophomores spend a great deal of time focusing on prepa- ration for the Connecticut Aca- demic Performance Test (CAPT) in English, math, and science classes. “Teachers have given us a lot of [CAPT] work from the begin- ning, and they have been really pushing it to make sure that we are prepared,” sophomore Matt Lewis said. Since teachers are forced to cover standardized testing in their curricula in order to ad- equately prepare students for exams, they often “teach to the test,” or cover specifically what students will be required to know for the exam. This severely lim- its students’ understanding of the material and often prevents the hands-on learning that engages students in ways that foster a thirst for knowledge. At Westhill, the Project Opening Doors (POD) grant awards AP English, math, and science teachers based on stu- dent achievement. If Westhill qualifies with a certain number of passing scores on the AP ex- ams, teachers can receive up to $3,000. Moreover, teachers will receive an additional $100 for every student who passes the test. Mrs. Khetan, lead math- ematics teacher for the POD grant, believes the program has no effect on teachers in terms of the effort they put forward. “Teachers do what they do be- cause they love their job,” she said. “The incentive that we may receive a bonus at the end of the year does not make us work any harder, but rather provides us with a nice reward.” Teachers should not be held accountable for their students’ performances on tests. All teach- ers work extremely hard to ensure that their students are receiving the best possible preparation, but they cannot control what each in- dividual student will retain. How students perform on these tests is up to them, not the teachers. Furthermore, there is the possibility of even the highest- achieving student drawing a blank on an exam or simply having an off day. In this sense, basing salaries on test results is unfair to the teachers who work so diligently. According to the National Center on Performance Incen- tives, a research institution at Vanderbilt University, a recent study on the effectiveness of merit pay has revealed that pro- viding teachers with incentives does not increase student test scores. The study, known as the Project on Incentives in Teaching (POINT), followed nearly 300 teachers in Nashville, Tennessee from 2007 to 2010. POINT dis- covered that offering bonuses to teachers based on their students’ performances on the Tennes- see Comprehensive Assessment Program had virtually no effect on their test results. Given this information, of- fering incentives for teachers based solely on student perfor- mance on standardized testing is unreasonable. Hard work should not go unrecognized, but basing teachers’ earnings on standard- ized test results is not the right way to reward them for their ef- forts. Teachers work too hard to risk their well-deserved pay on student performance on tests. 9 VIEWPOINT November 2010 www.thewestwordonline.com NO Poll by Christiana Provenzano, Arturo Lainez, Matt Katz, Brianna Skorvanek, and Dixita Viswanath. Out of 100 teachers and 300 students polled. Photos by Elissa Miolene / Photo Manager 11% of teachers & 71% of students support merit pay All teachers work extremely hard to ensure that their students are receiving the best possible preparation...how students perform on these tests is up to them, not the teachers. Westhill’s two cents regarding merit pay: 89% of teachers & 29% of students oppose merit pay
whs1120_009
Mar 17, 2016
VIEWPOINT November 2010 All teachers work extremely hard to ensure that their students are receiving the best possible preparation...how students perform on these tests is up to them, not the teachers. Zach Eisen www.thewestwordonline.com and sophomores spend a great deal of time focusing on prepa- ration for the Connecticut Aca- demic Performance Test (CAPT) Teachers should not be held accountable for their students’ performances on tests. All teach- ers work extremely hard to ensure
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Zach EisenPhoto Editor
As education reform is debat-ed across the nation, the issue of whether or not to pay teachers ac-cording to their students’ achieve-ment on standardized tests is a frequent topic of discussion.
The initiative, known as mer-it pay, has been debated for years and has even been endorsed by President Obama.
However, basing teachers’
salaries on test results is not a fair measure of the work they put in. Introducing merit pay to our school system will also increase the emphasis placed on standard-ized testing in the classroom.
Teachers have increasingly stressed the importance of stan-dardized testing over the last decade, mainly due to the No Child Left Behind Act. Passed in 2001, the No Child Left Behind Act uses standardized testing in primary and secondary schools
across the nation as a measure for determining whether or not individual schools are meeting state requirements. If schools fail to reach these standards, their national funding will be cut, potentially leading to more problems.
As the fear of losing funding spreads through school districts across the country, schools have been placing more emphasis on standardized testing. In Con-necticut, for example, freshmen
and sophomores spend a great deal of time focusing on prepa-ration for the Connecticut Aca-demic Performance Test (CAPT)
in English, math, and science classes.
“Teachers have given us a lot of [CAPT] work from the begin-ning, and they have been really pushing it to make sure that we are prepared,” sophomore Matt Lewis said.
Since teachers are forced to cover standardized testing in their curricula in order to ad-equately prepare students for exams, they often “teach to the test,” or cover specifically what students will be required to know for the exam. This severely lim-its students’ understanding of the material and often prevents the hands-on learning that engages students in ways that foster a thirst for knowledge.
At Westhill, the Project Opening Doors (POD) grant awards AP English, math, and science teachers based on stu-dent achievement. If Westhill qualifies with a certain number of passing scores on the AP ex-ams, teachers can receive up to $3,000. Moreover, teachers will receive an additional $100 for every student who passes the test.
Mrs. Khetan, lead math-ematics teacher for the POD grant, believes the program has no effect on teachers in terms of the effort they put forward. “Teachers do what they do be-cause they love their job,” she said. “The incentive that we may receive a bonus at the end of the year does not make us work any harder, but rather provides us with a nice reward.”
Teachers should not be held accountable for their students’ performances on tests. All teach-ers work extremely hard to ensure
that their students are receiving the best possible preparation, but they cannot control what each in-dividual student will retain. How students perform on these tests is up to them, not the teachers.
Furthermore, there is the possibility of even the highest-achieving student drawing a blank on an exam or simply having an off day. In this sense, basing salaries on test results is unfair to the teachers who work so diligently.
According to the National Center on Performance Incen-tives, a research institution at Vanderbilt University, a recent study on the effectiveness of merit pay has revealed that pro-viding teachers with incentives does not increase student test scores. The study, known as the Project on Incentives in Teaching (POINT), followed nearly 300 teachers in Nashville, Tennessee from 2007 to 2010. POINT dis-covered that offering bonuses to teachers based on their students’ performances on the Tennes-see Comprehensive Assessment Program had virtually no effect on their test results.
Given this information, of-fering incentives for teachers based solely on student perfor-mance on standardized testing is unreasonable. Hard work should not go unrecognized, but basing teachers’ earnings on standard-ized test results is not the right way to reward them for their ef-forts. Teachers work too hard to risk their well-deserved pay on student performance on tests.
9VIEWPOINT November 2010www.thewestwordonline.com
NO
Poll by Christiana Provenzano, Arturo Lainez, Matt Katz, Brianna Skorvanek, and Dixita Viswanath. Out of 100 teachers and 300 students polled. Photos by Elissa Miolene / Photo Manager
11% of teachers & 71% of students
support merit pay
All teachers work extremely hard to ensure that their students are receiving the best possible preparation...how students perform on these tests is up to them, not the teachers.
Westhill’s two cents regarding merit pay:89% of teachers &29% of students
oppose merit pay