Here is a real question

Students are measured based on performance. Better students (generally) receive better grades whereas indifferent or poor students (generally) receive inferior grades.

As a hard-working, rather intense student who worked hard for his grades, I have to admit I felt more than a little resentment towards classes where students who seldom or never attended classes or cracked books were allowed to cake-walk through with Bs or even, in some classes, As because the professors wanted to be popular.

Conversely, I long resented the class where the instructor told us our grades were entirely based on the final paper...which he further said was completely subjective, that there was no right or wrong answer...and I read some of the papers he gave a "C" to. Well constructed, good grammar and punctuation...and a C? Huh?

Occasional exceptions aside, however, I have to admit, I like that schools reward or punish effort + intellect more or less pretty well with grades.

Yes, there are exceptions...no, it isn't perfect...but it is a system that works decently to let students know how their efforts will move them along in the world.

After all, most jobs have similar systems. People who do a good job and show up regularly generally receive rewards in the form of recognition, occasional pitiful pay raises, and more vacation days. People who do poor jobs or do not bother to show up generally get no pay raise and/or get fired.


What I do not understand is why every time someone proposes putting teachers in a real world environment where the results of their work have some sort of impact on their pay, there is a big kick back.

Why?

This is not a sarcastic question, it is a legitimate question.

Take the Florida situation for example...are they just objecting because it is Republicant dominated? Would the same objections be raised if it was Destructocrats instead?

I genuinely do not understand the objection. I have had teachers of all sorts of qualities...from the one who took me aside and asked me to help a classmate stop picking his nose (demonstrating real care for his students) to the one who, in Junior High, not only did not bother to take attendance, when someone said they did not want to dissect a frog, allowed them to do homework for other classes instead...but still gave them an A for the class.

Why should the second one get rewarded just for being there another year? That is not a good teacher and does not deserve the same reward as Mr. Withers. Or Mr. Howell.

So please, I really, really, really want to know...why is performance basing such a bad thing?