I am starting to think that virtually every poster here has a lot more in common with each other than with disagreements they may have.
That we are in a financial crisis in this, and virtually every state, is probably a given.
That we have not valued education, and particularly, an education where standards are there, and yet the academic freedom to explore and evaluate content still remains important...these are, to me, significant concerns. There is a huge push for conformity over individuality from some elements in today's society, and that also concerns me deeply, because there will always be a significant number of people who either cannot, or will not conform to sheep-like behavior.
From the beginning of our public schools, (and we need to remember that public schools are relatively new in the course of world history) teachers have been targeted by virtually every side of philosophical, political, religious, or any other debating points that you might think of, who might disagree with whatever happened to be taught on a given day.
Remember what happened to Socrates in Ancient Greece?
(hint: be careful what you drink)
Now THAT was a poor teacher evaluation, but it certainly illustrates perhaps, the main reason that experienced teachers are tenured.
Creationism, evolution, religious topics, health studies, and philosophy were only five of a myriad of topics where, no matter WHAT a teacher mentioned in class, or for that matter, even failed to mention, someone was going to be upset. There needed to be some rudimentary protection for experienced teachers from knee-jerk administrative actions without there first being at least a due-process examination and hearing-out of all the facts before a teacher could be disciplined or terminated. THAT, to the best of my knowledge, was the fundamental premise for granting tenure to experienced public school teachers. The free pursuit of knowledge, unfettered by polemical guidance, was a fundamental part of public education. Obviously, from time to time, controversial topics, books, and even the free exchange of ideas could place teachers in jeopardy, and indeed, have often done so.
While it is certainly possible that a few tenured teachers could burn out or start to coast late in their careers, the reality of that matter is that the current appraisal processes in many districts allow such teachers to be monitored, mentored, and at times, supported in other ways, to help them through whatever may be going on in their lives. If indeed, they are not doing their job, (in fact, ANY TIME that I've seen that sort of thing happen) the reality would be, that it is not long before that teacher leaves the profession.
By the way, there are quite a few young teachers who discover that they can't cut it, either.
It would not be my desire to directly refute another poster here, but concerning the thought that some jobs might be more "strenuous" than teaching? There's physical strength involved with other jobs, to be sure, but there are other aspects that can make teaching an extremely stressful occupation for many, if not most teachers; at one time or another in their careers.
After a teacher has taught 30 or more years, that time period is well recognized by the profession as being a good career length. Some teachers do go 35, or even 40 years. It's an individual call. The longer you go, the more you draw at retirement.
Regarding the concept of merit pay? There is something about testing and evaluations that teachers learn in college: In order for any evaluation to be valid, it needs to be criterion-referenced...that is, measured against an objective standard of some kind. Up to this point, teacher pay has been based on longevity and education levels, and so, is already "merit-based". Those standards, as one can see, are easy to define and easy to understand..
The "merit pay" that seems to be desired these days, is for "excellent" teachers to be paid more. While on the surface, that might be considered a laudatory concept, the one problem is how would we objectively define what constitutes an "excellent" teacher? By student test scores, many would say...but there are so many variables with that standard to make it laughable, when one really thinks about it. Are those student tests also criterion-referenced, free from cultural, economic, or gender-biases, and fairly given? Do all students come from a similar demographic? What about IQ's? What about parental involvement as well as socio-economic considerations? Also who... will be grading the tests? Are they qualified graders, or just temporary workers given a rubric and hired for the day?
All too often, I'm afraid that the term "Merit Pay" turns out to be words without any real meaning....just another way to turn back the clock, so that a teacher could be arbitrarily fired or shortchanged at the whim of a vindictive administration or some angry parent.
Unions don't exist ONLY for the purpose of seeking better pay and benefits. They also stand by teachers to insure that such unfair, unjust or arbitrary attacks are defended.
All just my opinion, but you might be surprised at how many times I'm right.
Back to the banjo...
The only reason we did, is because Dad had to do other part-time work in the summer, etc... Had we relied on a teaching salary alone.... 