Performance-based contracts
Teacher contract arrangements should also be reconsidered as the current ones do not encourage teachers to improve their teaching quality. As civil servants or karachakan-kru some teachers who make no attempt to improve their teaching skills and student performance would hardly ever have their employment terminated; their contract would only end upon serious violation of school regulations. Evaluations are based on paperwork and academic research rather than improving students’ performance.
Even for teachers who are motivated to improve, current working conditions in schools demand they also spend time on non-academic workload. For example, one teacher might spend two to three hours a day on administration work and two to three months a year preparing school evaluations. Teachers, even ambitious and hard-working ones, are not given the time and space to improve their teaching skills.
While we think a secure life-long contract is needed, the contract should not protect and reward teachers who do not perform. Teachers who develop their teaching skills and seek to improve students’ learning outcomes should have more employment security and a clearer career progression plan.
Given the expected mass retirements and need to recruit new teachers, we think performance-based contracts should be put in place for hiring new teachers. Non-academic requirements not tied to teaching quality improvement should also be reduced to give teachers more time to focus on their individual development. While we understand these problems are challenging because there are many moving parts and all problems are interrelated, we think teacher quality reform is the most important first step.
Performance-based contracts
Teacher contract arrangements should also be reconsidered as the current ones do not encourage teachers to improve their teaching quality. As civil servants or karachakan-kru some teachers who make no attempt to improve their teaching skills and student performance would hardly ever have their employment terminated; their contract would only end upon serious violation of school regulations. Evaluations are based on paperwork and academic research rather than improving students’ performance.
Even for teachers who are motivated to improve, current working conditions in schools demand they also spend time on non-academic workload. For example, one teacher might spend two to three hours a day on administration work and two to three months a year preparing school evaluations. Teachers, even ambitious and hard-working ones, are not given the time and space to improve their teaching skills.
While we think a secure life-long contract is needed, the contract should not protect and reward teachers who do not perform. Teachers who develop their teaching skills and seek to improve students’ learning outcomes should have more employment security and a clearer career progression plan.
Given the expected mass retirements and need to recruit new teachers, we think performance-based contracts should be put in place for hiring new teachers. Non-academic requirements not tied to teaching quality improvement should also be reduced to give teachers more time to focus on their individual development. While we understand these problems are challenging because there are many moving parts and all problems are interrelated, we think teacher quality reform is the most important first step.
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..