Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.
People respond to incentives; in this case teachers doing what they can to increase their individual compensation as easily as possible. In NS, It seems that the two factors that determine compensation are (1) years on the job and (2) formal educational accomplishment.
Conspicuously absent from the list is anything related to (1) teaching effectiveness (are students in their classroom collectively performing? to what degree?) or (2) adding value (coaching teams, directing plays, leading groups, participating in activities outside of their formal duties).
It seems wrong that an effective, passionate teacher with 20 years experience, a masters degree, coached basketball and debating every year, and created an engaging learning environment would make the same salary as a teacher with the same 20 years experience and masters degree but was ineffective in the classroom, was not emotional invested, and rarely got involved in the extracurricular activities.
I would expect that teachers would be increasingly demoralized by this incentive structure. The union would be wise to push for a transition to a compensation structure that also rewards passion and results, not simply time-on-the-clock and academic credentials.
Rob Tyrrell | June 2, 2014 | Reply
Great editorial on teachers courses. No other profession in Nova Scotia where the money for that profession comes from the public purse has incentives like this where you take a course and automatically your salary increases as well as your pension increases. Time to reign the teachers in.
Matt | May 31, 2014 | Reply
So if we offered each of those 477 poor teachers a cash settlement of $20,000 each subject to their signing a release, I am willing to bet there would be a line up to collect and the NS taxpayer would save $40million.
When will this madness end?
Nicholas Carson | May 30, 2014 | Reply
Let us suppose for a minute that you are the manager of a bank branch.One day at closing time you overlook locking the Customer Safety Deposit Box section and the front door.Later that day the employees of the bank return and empty the Customer Safety Boxes etc..The next,day the Manager returns and sees what has taken place; surveys and considers the situation and then addresses the Tellers etc who are just standing around with their pockets full.The Manager says. “Holy cow,I made a mistake by forgetting to lock up , that’s not your fault, but I sure won’t do that again, now you please just forget it and get back to work”…..Perhaps I am just recalling something from Grimm’s Fairytales,so not much wonder it sounds somewhat familiar.
bob mackenzie | May 30, 2014 | Reply
… and every graduate who took a job in Nova Scotia did so in “good faith” of expecting to receive the Nova Scotia Graduate Retention Rebate (NSGRR).
In “fairness to those people”, i.e. graduating students, “they saw a set of regulations”, i.e. the NSGRR and made decisions based on the “… regulations that existed at the time”
I’m not suggesting the NSGRR should not have been terminated. Tough choices and decisions do need to be made. But if “fairness” is a factor considered by the Minister then existing recipients of the NSGRR should have been grandfathered as well. To grandfather pre-approved courses yet not continue the rebate to graduates who based decisions on its existence is inconsistent and grossly unfair.
Terminate the NSGRR may have been an appropriate decision, but then in the context of fairness, fiscal responsibility and as you so rightly state putting student interests first, these Drake course approvals must too be reversed. It is not too late to do so.
Norm Collins | May 30, 2014 | Reply
Creative Commons 2010 – Present