Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I'm not into my local politics, but something really special is going on right now. Our governor has taken a liking to the merit pay system for our public education system, and has plans to implement this system state-wide. The merit pay system for our state is a HUGE step in the right direction as far as opening up our educational system to the free-market, and also there have been plans to abolish the School Teacher Tenure that keeps bad teachers in the lounge despite sub-par performance.

 

True to Molyneux's opinion on the matter yet again, when they decided to experiment with getting Merit Pay implemented in the city of Renoldsburg, there was an immediate strike. For 2 weeks and 3 days this has been going on officially, and the Teacher's union has fought for the striking down of Merit Pay as well as a pay raise. I think the what's awesome about this is that the new superintendent is not budging on the matter-- and now as the strike comes to end after the usual media slants, court hearings, and plain old VIOLENCE against the substitute teachers, the teachers are facing some pretty harsh consequences as well as still having to deal with this new Merit Pay system.

 

Next on the list is the City of Mansfield, Dayton, and further down the road, the capitol... COLUMBUS.

 

So what do you guys think about this? What some predictions on a possible outcome?

Posted

The merit pay system for our state is a HUGE step in the right direction

 

Except that it's not. If theft (taxation) is immoral, then how the spoils of theft are distributed is irrelevant.

 

If they can get you to ask the wrong questions (merit pay or ____ instead of the initiation of the use of force or peaceful interaction), they don't care what your answers are.

Posted

Except that it's not. If theft (taxation) is immoral, then how the spoils of theft are distributed is irrelevant.

 

If they can get you to ask the wrong questions (merit pay or ____ instead of the initiation of the use of force or peaceful interaction), they don't care what your answers are.

I perfectly understand what your saying, I completely believe in the non-initiation of force, and that all forms of taxation are theft. I also understand that the public school systems run on tax-payer money, therefore your conclusion that no matter what choice is made in this regard, morally the system itself is in the ethical negatives. However, my contention is NOT that the system is going to cured because of the proposed merit pay, but it gives a glimpse of the power of the free-market as well as allowing space for further questions-- which is paramount to the unveiling of practical truth.

 

I view this just like an individual who's setting about the road to self-knowledge for the first time. Obviously, said individual is not going to miraculously transform years of conditioning and wrong thinking to right thinking just because they have the knowledge and desire for it, you have to clean the house and take things one step at a time realistically. Recognize that you haven't made it yet, but you are on the right path as well.The public school system at large may just be making a financial choice with no regard to ethics or their lack thereof, YET, the choice to get rid of public  school teacher tenure and traditional forms of payment shows a clear sign of the realization that the previous system cannot sustain itself, and people realize it.

 

The road to self-knowledge, thus to UPB, is to question, and remain organic. The steps taken here give the option of additional questions to be asked which, whether dealing with an individual or an entire society , is all you can hope for. Dsayers, by saying this is not a step in right the direction considering the failure of the current public school system, your implying that this either a stagnation or a step in the WRONG direction, please explain.

Posted

the choice to get rid of public  school teacher tenure and traditional forms of payment shows a clear sign of the realization that the previous system cannot sustain itself, and people realize it.

 

But why is it unsustainable? You cannot fix a problem that you do not fundamentally understand. What they're doing is just guessing. Meaning that even if they guessed right (let's stop funding via ill-gotten gains and switch to a voluntary model), there's no reason to expect that it would last. In order to be a step in the right direction, it would have to be a sound conclusion based on sound methodology. I would even go so far as to argue that "step in the right direction" is a myth perpetrated by the immoral to trick good people into accepting their immorality. Because if they arrived at a universal truth by way of principled analysis, there'd be no reason to hold onto any of it, eliminating the possibility of stepping.

 

Also, is unsustainability paramount? I would argue that the moral consideration is paramount. That moral solutions are sustainable is nice, but that's not where the value of morality comes from. It comes from the fact that it is an acceptance of reality, including one's own capacity for error, and is internally consistent.

 

Finally, I just wanted to point out that what you're referring to would not be the free market. Being happy that people would get to see that the free market works would not apply. People would still be stolen from to fund it, so it is ineligible for the description of free market. Free market is the sum of voluntary interactions completely devoid of coercion.

Posted

what exactly is merit in a public school?

 

this is not like some sales job, where we can measure productivity in sales.

 

there can be standard testing, so what, teachers will want students with better demographics that test better?

 

with public school, there is still compulsion, and lack of choice and the teacher selling students, with students just being assigned with a teacher or being mandated to take a class where there is only one teacher teaching the class.

 

this is not like some free market private tutor, where pay is based on what people are willing to pay and demand, rather than any set  "merit" or pay system based on tenur or whatever

Posted

what exactly is merit in a public school?

 

this is not like some sales job, where we can measure productivity in sales.

 

there can be standard testing, so what, teachers will want students with better demographics that test better?

 

with public school, there is still compulsion, and lack of choice and the teacher selling students, with students just being assigned with a teacher or being mandated to take a class where there is only one teacher teaching the class.

 

this is not like some free market private tutor, where pay is based on what people are willing to pay and demand, rather than any set  "merit" or pay system based on tenur or whatever

The merit pay system proposed is based directly on the TEACHER'S performance, not the students. All in all, the students stand gain from this. change.

Posted
The merit pay system proposed is based directly on the TEACHER'S performance, not the students. All in all, the students stand gain from this. change.

 

 

how is the teachers performance measured, if not by the performance of students as at least part of that measurement?

Posted

I agree largely with the OP in that this is a step in the right direction.  Is it all the steps needed to reach an ideal state with no aggression?  Nope.  Not even close. 

 

But it is at least an attempt to recognize the idea that compensation based on the value provided is a concept worth applying.  Even if it is applied in an imperfect manner.

 

This is a situation where I would say don't let perfect be the enemy of good.

Posted

But it is at least an attempt to recognize the idea that compensation based on the value provided is a concept worth applying.  Even if it is applied in an imperfect manner.

 

Or not applied at all? Even if the teachers would get paid on value provided, would the people paying the teachers be getting paid on value provided? Or are they paid because the money was taken under threat of violence?

 

This is a situation where I would say don't let gesture be the enemy of rational thought.

Posted

I'm pretty sure you already know the answers to the questions you asked, specifically the ones about paying based on value vs paying due to threat of violence.  Nobody is disputing that at all.

 

Ok, I agree with you on your last line.  Don't let gesture be the enemy of rational thought.  That doesn't prevent me from also applying "don't let perfect be the enemy of good".  In this case I view the change as good, and therefore support applying the change despite it not being perfect.

 

Is my thought not rational?

Posted

The best thing we can do is get the state out of the class room all together. The state should have no say in whom is payed, how much, what is taught, where or anything else for that matter. Really its an easy sell too. Ask any parent who knows whats best and has more interest in your child's education you or a bureaucrat you will never meet or know. Then ask them why they are fine with a system that does just the opposite. School vouchers would give the most liberty to the most people and increase competition. I fully admit that it dose nothing to stop the theft that is taxation right now other then making schooling more efficient and as such less costly but when you are dealing with the whale that is the public school indoctrination complex you can only take a bite at a time.

Posted

In this case I view the change as good, and therefore support applying the change despite it not being perfect.

 

Is my thought not rational?

 

Rationality is derived from the consistency of matter and energy. Theft is inconsistent as it is the simultaneous acceptance and rejection of property rights. So no, I don't find a premise that begins with stealing from people being described as good to be rational.

 

School vouchers would give the most liberty

 

I don't view an imposed unchosen positive obligation to be "the most liberty."

 

when you are dealing with the whale that is the public school indoctrination complex you can only take a bite at a time.

 

This is begging the question. Theft is either immoral or it is not. If it is, that's the end of the whale. If it's not, then there wouldn't be a need to take bites at all. When you say that you need to bargain with your slave master to get a portion of your freedom back, you're conceding that they own you from the outset. If you are not free in your own mind, you can never be free outside of your own mind.

Posted

I agree largely with the OP in that this is a step in the right direction.

 

 

I don't think this is a step in any direction.  It's all just smoke and mirrors.  Nothing will be accomplished by this.  Nothing has ever been accomplished by "merit pay" in a coercive institution.  It's really is a joke. 

 

The only thing that will happen, will be teachers cramming more useless rote-memorizing into their students heads so they will get better marks on tests.  You can kiss critical thinking goodbye (if there ever was any in the first place).

Posted

Here's my prediction/guess, merit pay will be destroyed eventually. My theory is it's much harder to create than to destroy. You have to fight tooth and nail implement, yet receive little resistance if you side with the unions. An example would be, let's say, you get 10 cities (or any number) total. This will take blood, sweat, tears, and risk to your job. Eventually someone will get elected who believes in(funded by?) unions. How long do you think those cities will last? I'm guessing they'll have things "straightened out" by next school year,if not sooner.

  • 2 weeks later...
Posted

These situations aren't all-or-nothing.  There are several steps of transactions involved in the entire institution of education.  If at least one can become voluntary rather than centrally-controlled, then how is that NOT a step in the right direction?  Any opportunity to introduce choice or voluntarism or fair exchange seems beneficial.

 

Perfect?  NO.  Better than before? I think so.

Posted

These situations aren't all-or-nothing.

 

ALL behaviors are either theft or not theft. I reject your claim that consent has more than two possible states.

 

Better than before? I think so.

 

I would argue that it is worse than before precisely because it tricks some people into thinking it's better than before. It's not just the wrong answer, it encourages people to stop looking for the right answer.

Posted

I didn't claim that consent has more than two possible states.

 

A process can involve multiple transactional steps, for example two.  It is possible for one transaction to be voluntary and the other one to be involuntary.

 

For example:  Robin Hood.  First step is to steal from the rich.  That is involuntary.  Next step is to give to the poor.  That is voluntary. 

 

There is no single status with regard to consent to describe the entire process of stealing from the rich to give to the poor.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.