http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/political-news/productivity-report-calls-for-scrapping-of-teacher-bonus-20120503-1y1vt.html

PERFORMANCE bonuses for high-performing teachers should be shelved, the Productivity Commission has recommended.

Victoria is the only state taking part in a pilot pay bonus trial for top teachers, which has been unpopular with teachers.

The federal government unveiled plans last year for a national performance bonus scheme, which will start paying teachers in 2014.

But the commission said the government should introduce that scheme as a temporary measure only, to test whether the scheme would actually work.

Any payments should be offered to high-performing teachers only, so the scheme ''does not entrench an expectation that higher certification automatically entitles teachers to higher pay''.

''Early results from these trials, together with the long history of mixed results from the US and elsewhere, suggest that an effective and widely applicable bonus system is unlikely to emerge in the forseeable future,'' the commission said.

It said a more costly option, but one that should be considered, was to transform teaching from annual pay increments to a ''performance-based career structure''.

The federal president of the Australian Education Union, Angelo Gavrielatos, welcomed the finding. ''The problem is, it's a one-off reward, a one-off bonus. What we need is a competitive professional salary for all teachers, to attract and retain the teachers that we need.''

The federal School Education Minister, Peter Garrett, said the report recognised the reforms that the government had begun to recruit and reward talented teachers.

''The report makes a number of recommendations to improve the schools workforce, but recognises that we are already making important changes in this area,'' Mr Garrett said.

''For example, we are already delivering on the report's finding that teachers need better feedback and support, with the release last week of a consultation paper for a national teacher appraisal system. This will see every teacher receive annual constructive feedback on their performance.''

But the report also revisited teacher underperformance, to which it said policymakers paid too little attention. ''Though there appears to have been little formal research on this issue, available data indicate that very few teachers in government schools are ever deemed to be underperforming.'' The commission said principals should have the power to fire teachers who failed to improve their performance.

I agree with the commission. The system of performance review and employment structure for teachers is appalling. The teachers union needs putting in it's place and teachers put on performance based pay and stop hiding behind children. I don't blame teachers, i blame 40 years of state government and the union who both have failed to act in the best interest of teachers and students never mind the complete failure of government on all levels in public education.

Howard diverted billions dollars of public funds to the exclusive private schools so its no wonder there is a problem funding public schools.
An overhaul of Howards system of robbing poor families of a decent education just so the elite can have expensive latte machines and manicured tennis courts has always been a disgrace and is a long time coming.

nairbe wrote on May 5^th, 2012 at 6:36am:

I agree with the commission. The system of performance review and employment structure for teachers is appalling. The teachers union needs putting in it's place and teachers put on performance based pay and stop hiding behind children. I don't blame teachers, i blame 40 years of state government and the union who both have failed to act in the best interest of teachers and students never mind the complete failure of government on all levels in public education.

what would you do if you were education minister??

.... you seem to dislike everything that been or being done??..

btw the teachers union is one of the most militant . and immoveable.

when my son was in high school he had two teachers he couldnt understand...one Irish, one Indian..the Indian lady was his science teacher..

how you expect to hold their attention let alone teach them anything. when they cant understand how you speak...is beyond me..

what would you do if you were education minister??


Heaven help us if that ever happens Cods.

It seems like adelcrow is right.  Why do they spend so much on well off elite private schools?.  Yet have trouble funding public schools.   :(

cods wrote on May 5^th, 2012 at 7:36am:

nairbe wrote on May 5th, 2012 at 6:36am: I agree with the commission. The system of performance review and employment structure for teachers is appalling. The teachers union needs putting in it's place and teachers put on performance based pay and stop hiding behind children. I don't blame teachers, i blame 40 years of state government and the union who both have failed to act in the best interest of teachers and students never mind the complete failure of government on all levels in public education. what would you do if you were education minister?? .... you seem to dislike everything that been or being done??.. btw the teachers union is one of the most militant . and immoveable. when my son was in high school he had two teachers he couldnt understand...one Irish, one Indian..the Indian lady was his science teacher.. how you expect to hold their attention let alone teach them anything. when they cant understand how you speak...is beyond me..

You can thank Howards cuts that led to todays skills shortage...the time to pay the piper had to come.
Experts had been warning of a skills shortage as Howard cut vital programs to divert billions into the pollies superannuation slush fund so neo cons can never say they were not warned of the consequences of Howards shortsighted politically motivated policies.

Well that does say a lot doesn't it?.  The Howard government always were for the well off, and the big end of town.   :(

wrote on May 5^th, 2012 at 8:08am:

Well that does say a lot doesn't it?.  The Howard government always were for the well off, and the big end of town.   :(

As we know as soon as this govt makes any sounds about clawing back the taxpayers money Howard handed to the blue bloods the junk media and born to rule class scream from the rooftops.
This govt does not have the courage to stand up to the billionaires that now run the Liberal and National parties and the country.

This is why people should vote 1 Australian Greens.  The fair and sensible people.   :)

wrote on May 5^th, 2012 at 8:20am:

This is why people should vote 1 Australian Greens.  The fair and sensible people.   :)

I couldnt agree more and with Peter Whish-Wilson taking Bob Browns place in the Senate they are showing they are now the only party for small business, the environment and policies for the future of this country.
Now the Libs, Nats and LNP are owned by a handful of self serving multi billionaires and the Labor Party is crippled with fear the Greens are only the party for the future.

adelcrow wrote on May 5^th, 2012 at 7:10am:

Howard diverted billions dollars of public funds to the exclusive private schools so its no wonder there is a problem funding public schools. An overhaul of Howards system of robbing poor families of a decent education just so the elite can have expensive latte machines and manicured tennis courts has always been a disgrace and is a long time coming.

So how would you have done it without discriminating?

Maqqa wrote on May 5^th, 2012 at 8:50am:

adelcrow wrote on May 5th, 2012 at 7:10am: Howard diverted billions dollars of public funds to the exclusive private schools so its no wonder there is a problem funding public schools. An overhaul of Howards system of robbing poor families of a decent education just so the elite can have expensive latte machines and manicured tennis courts has always been a disgrace and is a long time coming. So how would you have done it without discriminating?

There was never any need to rip taxpayers money out of the public system to pour into the elite schools.
This was all about rewarding these schools for supporting Howard and the Liberal Party at the expense of those that really needed the funding.
The same has also been said about the private health funds and hospitals, the money taken out of the public system and handed to them was as a reward for their long term support of the Liberal Party and has been at the expense of the public health system.
All of this has been known since the day Howard started using taxpayers money to reward certain sectors for their support.

adelcrow wrote on May 5^th, 2012 at 9:05am:

Maqqa wrote on May 5th, 2012 at 8:50am: adelcrow wrote on May 5th, 2012 at 7:10am: Howard diverted billions dollars of public funds to the exclusive private schools so its no wonder there is a problem funding public schools. An overhaul of Howards system of robbing poor families of a decent education just so the elite can have expensive latte machines and manicured tennis courts has always been a disgrace and is a long time coming. So how would you have done it without discriminating? There was never any need to rip taxpayers money out of the public system to pour into the elite schools. This was all about rewarding these schools for supporting Howard and the Liberal Party at the expense of those that really needed the funding. The same has also been said about the private health funds and hospitals, the money taken out of the public system and handed to them was as a reward for their long term support of the Liberal Party and has been at the expense of the public health system. All of this has been known since the day Howard started using taxpayers money to reward certain sectors for their support.

So how would you do it without parents migrating their children into the public sector which will increase costs to the government more than the current system

This is the same dilemma facing the health industry with private health insurance. The more people who are on private health insurance - the less reliance they are on the public purse to finance their medical bills. Given the way insurance work they look at having a reserve even though you are not using the system (very much like the Workcover scheme). More people on the public system them more reserve is needed therefore more costs even though you might not use it.

So I ask again - how would you do it?

Maqqa wrote on May 5^th, 2012 at 8:50am:

adelcrow wrote on May 5th, 2012 at 7:10am: Howard diverted billions dollars of public funds to the exclusive private schools so its no wonder there is a problem funding public schools. An overhaul of Howards system of robbing poor families of a decent education just so the elite can have expensive latte machines and manicured tennis courts has always been a disgrace and is a long time coming. So how would you have done it without discriminating?

Isn't the whole liberal mantra about letting the market forces decide? If these private schools can't cut it in the real world without government funding, they shouldn't be there. Its hypocrisy on the liberal parties end to scream about market forces until they are blue in the face, and then subsidies these private enterprises with money that is desperately needed by our public schools.

So Socialism is ok as long as it only applies to wealthy private schools and the private health sector?
Strange logic to say the least...in the USA any govt that did that would be accused of rampant communism.

Johnsmith wrote on May 5^th, 2012 at 9:19am:

Maqqa wrote on May 5th, 2012 at 8:50am: adelcrow wrote on May 5th, 2012 at 7:10am: Howard diverted billions dollars of public funds to the exclusive private schools so its no wonder there is a problem funding public schools. An overhaul of Howards system of robbing poor families of a decent education just so the elite can have expensive latte machines and manicured tennis courts has always been a disgrace and is a long time coming. So how would you have done it without discriminating? Isn't the whole liberal mantra about letting the market forces decide? If these private schools can't cut it in the real world without government funding, they shouldn't be there. Its hypocrisy on the liberal parties end to scream about market forces until they are blue in the face, and then subsidies these private enterprises with money that is desperately needed by our public schools.

No it's not!!

If you look at the history of the Liberal Party - a simple Wiki would suffice - you will see that it has it's roots in the Labor party. It was a break away group.

However the Labor party would like to demonise the LIBs with the same brush as the silver spooners in the UK.

The Liberal party you see today is really a centre-right party. It believes in allowing some influences of market forces.

The Labor party today is a centre-left ie it believes more government intervention.

There main difference between the two parties are not policies and ideals - it's more implementation of those ideals.

So you can continue to believe the lies being spread by the Greens - but now you can no longer say you didn't know!!

adelcrow wrote on May 5^th, 2012 at 9:26am:

So Socialism is ok as long as it only applies to wealthy private schools and the private health sector? Strange logic to say the least...in the USA any govt that did that would be accused of rampant communism.

So you don't know anything other than to repeat the rhetoric of the ALP and their union mates!!!

Maqqa wrote on May 5^th, 2012 at 9:30am:

adelcrow wrote on May 5th, 2012 at 9:26am: So Socialism is ok as long as it only applies to wealthy private schools and the private health sector? Strange logic to say the least...in the USA any govt that did that would be accused of rampant communism. So you don't know anything other than to repeat the rhetoric of the ALP and their union mates!!!

Ask any American if they want their elite private schools and private health sector propped up by taxpayers..they will call you a dirty communist.
Try it and see what reaction you get.

adelcrow wrote on May 5^th, 2012 at 9:35am:

Maqqa wrote on May 5th, 2012 at 9:30am: adelcrow wrote on May 5th, 2012 at 9:26am: So Socialism is ok as long as it only applies to wealthy private schools and the private health sector? Strange logic to say the least...in the USA any govt that did that would be accused of rampant communism. So you don't know anything other than to repeat the rhetoric of the ALP and their union mates!!! Ask any American if they want their elite private schools and private health sector propped up by taxpayers..they will call you a dirty communist. Try it and see what reaction you get.

But we are not talking about the American system - we are referring to the Australian Westminster system

Maqqa wrote on May 5^th, 2012 at 9:28am:

Johnsmith wrote on May 5th, 2012 at 9:19am: Maqqa wrote on May 5th, 2012 at 8:50am: adelcrow wrote on May 5th, 2012 at 7:10am: Howard diverted billions dollars of public funds to the exclusive private schools so its no wonder there is a problem funding public schools. An overhaul of Howards system of robbing poor families of a decent education just so the elite can have expensive latte machines and manicured tennis courts has always been a disgrace and is a long time coming. So how would you have done it without discriminating? Isn't the whole liberal mantra about letting the market forces decide? If these private schools can't cut it in the real world without government funding, they shouldn't be there. Its hypocrisy on the liberal parties end to scream about market forces until they are blue in the face, and then subsidies these private enterprises with money that is desperately needed by our public schools. No it's not!! If you look at the history of the Liberal Party - a simple Wiki would suffice - you will see that it has it's roots in the Labor party. It was a break away group. However the Labor party would like to demonise the LIBs with the same brush as the silver spooners in the UK. The Liberal party you see today is really a centre-right party. It believes in allowing some influences of market forces. The Labor party today is a centre-left ie it believes more government intervention. There main difference between the two parties are not policies and ideals - it's more implementation of those ideals. So you can continue to believe the lies being spread by the Greens - but now you can no longer say you didn't know!!

Don't care about the roots of the party , someone had a good idea, good or bad, but politicians being what they are would have stuffed that up. Do you think the liberal party has followed the ideology that it claimed when it was first established? or does it chop and change to suit over time?  ... ... Mr fat slob shadow treasurer Hockey has several times said on national TV that he believes government shouldn't interfere (in automotive industry for example) and that the market will take care of itself ... now if he is going to use that excuse,  then he should apply it across the board, and not just when it suits him ... forgetting market forces when it comes to helping his mates while shouting the benefits of market forces when it suits him is HYPOCRISY in the largest order

Howard loved to hand out billions of taxpayers dollars to the elite institutions that supported him. He did this by cutting funding to public education and health and never forget is was Toni Abbott that lied about cuts to public health during an election campaign.
We either shovel out taxpayers money equally to all private institutions and businesses or we dont do it at all.

adelcrow wrote on May 5^th, 2012 at 7:10am:

Howard diverted billions dollars of public funds to the exclusive private schools so its no wonder there is a problem funding public schools. An overhaul of Howards system of robbing poor families of a decent education just so the elite can have expensive latte machines and manicured tennis courts has always been a disgrace and is a long time coming.

Total garbage. No money was taken from public schools. Just new money given to private schools. The public school problem has little to do with funding. Finland has almost no private schools at all and their funding is lower than ours yet they have arguably the best learning outcomes on the planet. Why?  welll... virtually no education dept or education union running the place. The schools are run almost independently by teh principls and school board. they can hire and fire and pay performance bonuses and sack those that are no good.  In other words, they operate exactly like private schools do and the outcomes are similarly superior.

adelcrow wrote on May 5^th, 2012 at 9:35am:

Maqqa wrote on May 5th, 2012 at 9:30am: adelcrow wrote on May 5th, 2012 at 9:26am: So Socialism is ok as long as it only applies to wealthy private schools and the private health sector? Strange logic to say the least...in the USA any govt that did that would be accused of rampant communism. So you don't know anything other than to repeat the rhetoric of the ALP and their union mates!!! Ask any American if they want their elite private schools and private health sector propped up by taxpayers..they will call you a dirty communist. Try it and see what reaction you get.

wow what a devastating argument... America with the worst health system in the western world AND the worsts public education system in the world.  And you think we should emulate them?

Thanks for making a killer argument for the OTHER side of what you believe in.

longweekend58 wrote on May 5^th, 2012 at 3:44pm:

adelcrow wrote on May 5th, 2012 at 9:35am: Maqqa wrote on May 5th, 2012 at 9:30am: adelcrow wrote on May 5th, 2012 at 9:26am: So Socialism is ok as long as it only applies to wealthy private schools and the private health sector? Strange logic to say the least...in the USA any govt that did that would be accused of rampant communism. So you don't know anything other than to repeat the rhetoric of the ALP and their union mates!!! Ask any American if they want their elite private schools and private health sector propped up by taxpayers..they will call you a dirty communist. Try it and see what reaction you get. wow what a devastating argument... America with the worst health system in the western world AND the worsts public education system in the world.  And you think we should emulate them? Thanks for making a killer argument for the OTHER side of what you believe in.

Thats not what I said..
I said you fellas sure love Socialism when it suits you.

cods wrote on May 5^th, 2012 at 7:36am:

nairbe wrote on May 5th, 2012 at 6:36am: I agree with the commission. The system of performance review and employment structure for teachers is appalling. The teachers union needs putting in it's place and teachers put on performance based pay and stop hiding behind children. I don't blame teachers, i blame 40 years of state government and the union who both have failed to act in the best interest of teachers and students never mind the complete failure of government on all levels in public education. what would you do if you were education minister?? .... you seem to dislike everything that been or being done??.. btw the teachers union is one of the most militant . and immoveable. when my son was in high school he had two teachers he couldnt understand...one Irish, one Indian..the Indian lady was his science teacher.. how you expect to hold their attention let alone teach them anything. when they cant understand how you speak...is beyond me..

OK cods, being that i am a parent with three in school and have been involved in P&C as well as management of a major school renovation project i do have some ideas.
[list bull-blackball]

Teachers should be paid on performance not years of service.
[list bull-blackball]

Schools should be grouped into area administrations so teachers can be moved around schools to keep it fresh
[list bull-blackball]

Teachers should be hired and fired by the school group.
[list bull-blackball]

teachers should only have 4 weeks leave and be required to be at the schiool working other wise
[list bull-blackball]

the union should be given an ultimatum, get with the program or all staff will be terminated and teacher re employed on contract only

There is a really good pilot scheme running in some schools where teachers are reviewed monthly. It has had great success.

http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/stories/2012/02/06/3421391.htm

adelcrow wrote on May 5^th, 2012 at 3:46pm:

longweekend58 wrote on May 5th, 2012 at 3:44pm: adelcrow wrote on May 5th, 2012 at 9:35am: Maqqa wrote on May 5th, 2012 at 9:30am: adelcrow wrote on May 5th, 2012 at 9:26am: So Socialism is ok as long as it only applies to wealthy private schools and the private health sector? Strange logic to say the least...in the USA any govt that did that would be accused of rampant communism. So you don't know anything other than to repeat the rhetoric of the ALP and their union mates!!! Ask any American if they want their elite private schools and private health sector propped up by taxpayers..they will call you a dirty communist. Try it and see what reaction you get. wow what a devastating argument... America with the worst health system in the western world AND the worsts public education system in the world.  And you think we should emulate them? Thanks for making a killer argument for the OTHER side of what you believe in. Thats not what I said.. I said you fellas sure love Socialism when it suits you.

no. you used possibly the worst argument possible. but being a Green, we are used to that.