SCSU Scholars welcome your comments. Offensive material will be deleted.
OK, I know this is way the hell after the fact, but I just have to point out the hilarity: someone who assumes that people who compete for the same pool of money for raises will automatically be cut-throat a-holes in every possible way just to get slightly better pay... then turns around and calls other people "self-absorbed moral cretins." King, didn't you know that money is the only possible motivation for every human action? He's got people pegged; us private-sector types are never willing to mentor or help anyone else for exactly that reason. Why, we withhold advice, suggestions, and help all the time, company or project success be damned!
Sounds like a bit of projection, if you ask me. Co-workers of TLFKAS beware...
I think you are misunderstanding the program. Q-Comp is designed to compensate for good performance. If anyone within a bonus structure does good on their job, they deserve a bonus. Some school districts mismanaged money and actually went into the hole because they anticipated that teachers would not "meet the mark". I feel that one issue with the q-comp plan is mismanagement from the top.
"Too long for a comment"
Now THAT'S shocking [/sarcasm off>
Too long for a comment:
http://
thecuckingstool.blogspot....arathustra.html
Team production doesn't mean equal pay; take a look at team sports, where the highest level of competition is between teams with greatly unequal pay. Surgical teams have a great deal of cooperation towards the production of health and unequal pay. (As the consumer, I barely see the doctor; the nurse and therapist are necessary for the surgery to be effective.)
It is arguable that the production of student success is joint; I don't think you can argue that it is inseparable, that you cannot measure individual contributions to the team product. (Not arguing that it's easy, just that it's doable. See basketball for a case where it's hard but done.)
I'll assume you are not arguing that teachers respond to merit pay by worse performance due to poor morale. That doesn't speak well for teachers, and I don't think they deserve that reputation.
Should teachers in public education consider themselves to be competitors or team members? Is this a work environments where it is more beneficial to the students to have everyone working toward a common goal rather than toward individual recognition and reward?
Well, Professor, Spot will keep company with most anybody who doesn't seem to need to get the ruler out at every turn.
Oh Spot! You've earned your way to the right margin! Well done! You and Ellenbecker should make nice company.
But see: http://thecuckingstool.blogspot....lse-has-
it.html you self-absorbed moral cretins.
A year ago, the faculty senate dealt with a proposal by MnSCU to award a dozen or so MnSCU faculty each year with $5,000 awards for excellence. I was amazed at the overwhelming disdain for this proposal. They didn't want to have to compete with people at other universities. And apparently awarding some people for being excellent implies that everyone else is not excellent, and in our union we simply cannot have that. They wanted to take the money and distribute it equally to everyone, which would have amounted to about $30 per person.
As a scene in "The Incredibles" goes:
"Everyone is special."
"Then no one is."
Commenting by HaloScan
