By Stefan Sasse
you wanted to give future teachers performance bonuses, Schavan said at the Stuttgart Education Fair didacta to "be the best teacher of a vintage". How do you want, as always not apparent. There is almost no reform proposal that is put forward so often without further contour "pay teachers according to performance," as, always connected to the argument that it would get better people. Just what is "power" with a teacher anyway? Who defines what constitutes a "good" teacher? Ask five teachers and you'll get five different answers. Objectivity is possible in a school with only the means to apply the teachers themselves with mixed results (have) to quantify P. notes. Either, then you begin to evaluate future teachers for a fixed set of criteria - that would be the end of creative and made of joy teaching. Instead, he would have to meet only a handful of likely unrealistic criteria to some extent a continuation of indefinitive classroom visits from trainees, who themselves have to do with real teaching anything. Or do we like to quantify student performance: the better the grades of the students, the better obviously the teacher. Ludger Wissman by the Ifo Institute argues for such a solution. How far it should be motivating for the work of teachers, at the mercy of the daily output of young people to be dependent on who may have spent the night before in a disco, remains open. Conceivable anyway, this way only by a uniform assessment tests, such as the Central BaWü in class work. Every teacher would use this but only the main part of the school year out, drill the students on a good performance in these key tests - would seriously learned nothing, any creativity or initiative stifled. Finally sunk this stupid idea of "pay for performance" - it does not work.
0 comments:
Post a Comment