Those who pay for education should consider the benefits of a bonus system for students. We have been watching the Canadian and U.S. national level of education stall in the doldrums, as compared to other nations. Not shamefully so but irritatingly so. We need to reverse this slow slide. We, Western citizens of rich nation, are not serving our students well. We pay our teachers; we should consider paying our students, --- who, --- after a good service rendered by the system, --- a passing grade and more, --- would decide to pay their teachers in an appropriate way, by merit, a worthy amount. Teachers will make more in salary, once the low achievers drop out, and students will pay less, as their productivity increases. I think this beats indebting our students for years, as we are doing now. A bonus system, similar to that used in the work force would encourage students to learn better as well as having teachers organize better. All sales and human resource oriented people, as well as those who have worked in a bonus system will agree; a bonus system produces better results and productivity in the personnel than just a straight pay cheque. That fact, should tell all who pay for education, including students, that the best use of our hard earned money, --- is not to give it to teachers while indebting students, --- but to recognize that the thing to do, is to give it to the students, --- in a bonus system. That system would range from the low achievers paying full price, to the high achievers paying nothing. We already have this type of a program, for high achievers. They are given bursaries, grants, and scholarships. With this system already in place we can expand it to represent all students at all levels of education from daycare on up. If we refuse to reward learning for all students, the doldrums of our education levels will eventually position us in a whirlpool, in terms of world level education. Not a very smart thing for a nation to do. I hope you recognize the logic and reason of such a bonus system, and more importantly, recognize the benefits and savings that it would yield to all students and tax payers. Do you see the benefits? Regards DL
While I can appreciate the logic of what you suggest, it does make it harder for those who are not the best and brightest to pull themselves up and make the most of what they have. Kind of sucks for them. You have to work three times harder to get as far as others AND you get no financial assistance? I remember one of my physics professors talking about his days at MIT. He said that he was working his butt off while the top students were playing bridge.
I understand. In a bonus system, students at the bottom of the learning curve would get the time they need from qualified teachers who could spend the required time without penalizing them. It would also stop the bridge playing as students the high producers could fast track themselves out of school faster than the low producers and allow the teachers to concentrate on the low producers who need their help more than the high producers. Regards DL
This would benefit the best and brightest, who generally do not need the additional help. It would penalize the least intelligent/capable - and those are the people who need the most help from our educational system.
I agree with your first. Not with the rest. I see it as the least intelligent/capable also being better motivated by the financial rewards as the learning rewards do not seem to be enough to engage them into trying to do better. Regards DL
Why would an award they can never win motivate them? There are already innumerable scholarships they can't win; those scholarships don't motivate them.
We are talking the mid range students. Not the high achievers. The mid range students will try harder if the higher their grade goes, the more they can save. Regards DL
You just said "I see it as the least intelligent/capable also being better motivated by the financial rewards." In both cases, the high achievers will win all the awards, by definition.
Not when the program outlined above is basically a pro-rated scholarship program where the higher the student scores, the more he recoups of his debt. Even the low achiever can reduce his debt but he might wonder why he is paying for something he does not seem to be able to grasp. Regards DL
The low achiever cannot substantially reduce his debt, and so dropping out and giving up become more common. Meanwhile, the top achievers get a free ride on the back of the low achiever. This is exactly the opposite of what the goal should be. The goal should be free education for all, with more resources spent on the kids with special needs (learning disabilities etc.)
The low achiever cannot at present reduce his debt but under a pro-rated system he could. I am not sure is a free system of education is the answer as then students just have the usual motivation and if you know of the drunken university parties and people taking courses that they will never use, thanks to someone else paying for their education, that being free does not equate to making it better. I want quality. Not a quantity of cab drivers with art degrees. Just to name one area of study. Regards DL
If you mean "spend more money at all levels" then I agree. If you mean take a given amount of money and give more money to high achievers, and less to low achievers via a competitive system (rather than an even spread) then I disagree. That hurts the people we need to help most. Right now the motivation to get a good education is an increase in salary of tens of thousands (sometimes hundreds of thousands) of dollars a year. And even with that you have those "drunken university parties." Unless you are going to do more than that (millions of dollars a year?) it's not going to be improve much. Why do you think a cab driver with an art degree necessarily has a "low quality" degree? Is your only criterion employability?
No. It is putting a degree to work for you. Unless you think those getting those degrees want to be cab drivers before choosing their degrees. The program I envisage would cost us less and not more money thanks to the increase in productivity and being able to purge the system of poor teachers as judged by students and marks. It would be a pro-rated system that would, as we have today, give more to the high achievers and less to the low achievers. The low achievers would have to decide if it is worth their own dollars via not gaining a bonus, to remain in a course that they cannot excel at. They may choose to spend their education dollars where they might have a better chance at being a high producer. Regards DL
Correct. Some are willing to drive a cab while they wait for a job they wanted, yes. You're talking about two different things. Get better teachers = absolutely. That will take more money, because money gets talent. Spend less money on low acheivers, and more on high achievers = absolutely not. If it already happens now, and it doesn't work (per your claim) - why would your system work? Ah, so your solution is that the poor achievers drop out! Or take Old English Literature instead of engineering because it's easier. Regards DL[/QUOTE]
To your first. We already do that with our scholarships and grant systems. You would have to convince a lot of people that it is better to pay the poor achievers more than the high achievers. Good luck with that. To your last. It does work and that is why I would expand it to all students so that all coulds profit according to their abilities. Regards DL
No need, since I don't think we should PAY the poor achievers anything - just make sure that the resources to get the additional education they need are there. Good luck convincing the public that the students who are already making out very well with scholarships and grants need even more money.
I did not indicate that the high producers needed more. It is the rest that need the help. Your --- "just make sure that the resources to get the additional education they need are there" --- seems to indicate that you know this and my program just does that from a different and better direction that engages the student. Regards DL
