Furthermore for staff, the isolation and often a lack of experience teaching large senior or specialised classes in these remote areas disadvantages them when competing for a position in a larger, less remote location.
Ironically, teachers in supposedly disadvantaged metropolitan schools are seen as attractive acquisitions for a school because they are regarded as being resourceful and innovative in their work: whereas teachers in remote communities are often seen as being “out of the loop”.
There are also limitations to arguments that performance pay should be based on teachers meeting certain professional standards. While this is by far the most objective measure, no standard can be general enough to include all contexts while simultaneously being rigorous enough to base a remuneration package on. There is a big difference between a disadvantaged metropolitan school, an isolated rural school and a school in a well off suburb. All of these contexts require teachers to have different skills, and all have a different measure of success.
Advertisement
As reported earlier in the year from research from the University of Sydney, it is not the money that attracts teachers. It is the altruistic motivation of loving the work they do. Performance pay does nothing to advance this, and may indeed undermine the collegial work environment which schools rely upon. What is for certain though is that it does nothing to advance the education of the students in our remote and isolated schools.
Discuss in our Forums
See what other readers are saying about this article!
Click here to read & post comments.
5 posts so far.