Except it is if you are going to reward effective teachers.
“Five years with an effective teacher, not just an average teacher, is sufficient to close the achievement gap between middle- and low-income youngsters,” said Sandy Kress, an Austin-based lobbyist and author of the report.
As former chief education adviser for President Bush, Kress helped construct the federal No Child Left Behind Act. He is also education adviser to the Governor’s Business Council, a nonprofit organization of Texas business leaders.
So it takes five years for a student to catch up? Is that with the same teacher or within the same subject? Is the improvement distributed evenly over the five years or does it start off slowly and then accelerate? How do they match the students and the teachers? If it takes five years, why are schools expected to get students on grade level within a year? And most importantly, how is a poor school district going to keep these effective teachers from moving to wealthier districts and better teaching conditions?
The initial cost of implementation, Kress said, would be between $125 million and $150 million.
Which will be funded how?
As outlined by Kress, the system would develop over several years, take into account factors such as test scores, test score growth, principal and peer evaluations and ultimately allow the state and school districts to offer higher pay to teachers who demonstrate better results and take on more challenging assignments.He said no new money would be tied to the legislation this session, but that business leaders would endorse bonuses for teachers once a fair evaluation system was in place.
Are these the same business leaders that refuse to disclose the selling price of property to avoid paying their fair share of school property taxes? Until these business experts get real and address school finance, why are we even listening to these people?