Make it private and save the state some money...

Welease

ntlbell wrote: »

No you didn't not one idea and not one way to do it.

I've worked in some of the companies you mention, and currently work for one.

I understand how *I* do performance managment. I understand how in lots of private sector companies and roles that are easy to performance manage.

teaching isn't one of them.

You're a linux system engineer in google.

You're given 200 servers to manage.

the goal is 99.99999% uptime.

6 months in you're at 95%

We can see clearly there is a performance issue.

You're a sales rep in intel, your target is X amount of sales per month

6 months in your 35% off, we can see there's a performance issue.

now there is actually ways to figure out performance.

tangible real results.

now, 3rd time

how do we do it for teachers.

how do we calculate the performance? what can we put in place to accurately judge the performance

try it.

it's not rocket science :rolleyes:

If you worked for those companies then you should know exactly how meritocracy works, and it shouldn't need explanation, but ....

ok .. so when your guys hit their uptime (which is what happens on those companies), what next level of observation amd data indicators do the manager use?... they base meritocracy on observed behaviours like communication skills, planning, delivery of projects, interaction with co-workers/customer, difficulty of environment, innovation, coaching etc etc etc etc... (whatever skills are deemed important in those roles).

For teachers, as I said.. there are plenty of behaviours/skills that are required by teacher.. and they have been listed here by others previously.

But, some basics.. (again)..

Exam marks will play a part
Respect and authority that a teacher has amongst staff
Does a teacher constantly get higher than average grades
Does a teach lose control of classes
Does a teacher command respect from the pupils
Has a teacher taken a difficult class (or student) and delivered improvements
Is the teacher organised and planned
Do they have good communication skills. (and no they are not all good communicators, I had teachers who frankly couldnt communicate a basic idea to anyone)
What do the pupils think of the teacher ( and despite your previous remarks, I would assume a head teacher would be capably of realised the valuable feedback from the less valuable feedback)
Does the teacher help and coach other teachers
Are they a positive influence on their environment..

(I'm sure teachers can build a more comprehensive and correct list)..

Essentially you look at all the skills that differentiate a great teacher from a poor teacher and try to quantify those amongst your staff...

Edit - Your specific examples only look at the basics.. If I had two Linux engineers with 200 servers with 99.9999999% uptime and one of them had worked a plan to reduce the required servers down to 150, and implemented less scheduled downtime for required patches, had implemented a communciations process to let customers know in advance when servers would be going offline thus improving satisfaction rating, had reduced my power consumption by switching off servers when it was proven they were never accessed... Are the both still equal now?

ntlbell

Welease wrote: »

For teachers, as I said.. there are plenty of behaviours/skills that are required by teacher.. and they have been listed here by others previously.

But, some basics.. (again)..

Exam marks will play a part
Respect and authority that a teacher has amongst staff
Does a teacher constantly get higher than average grades
Does a teach lose control of classes
Does a teacher command respect from the pupils
Has a teacher taken a difficult class (or student) and delivered improvements
Is the teacher organised and planned
Do they have good communication skills. (and no they are not all good communicators, I had teachers who frankly couldnt communicate a basic idea to anyone)
What do the pupils think of the teacher ( and despite your previous remarks, I would assume a head teacher would be capably of realised the valuable feedback from the less valuable feedback)
Does the teacher help and coach other teachers
Are they a positive influence on their environment..

(I'm sure teachers can build a more comprehensive and correct list)..

Essentially you look at all the skills that differentiate a great teacher from a poor teacher and try to quantify those amongst your staff...

Edit - Your specific examples only look at the basics.. If I had two Linux engineers with 200 servers with 99.9999999% uptime and one of them had worked a plan to reduce the required servers down to 150, and implemented less scheduled downtime for required patches, had implemented a communciations process to let customers know in advance when servers would be going offline thus improving satisfaction rating, had reduced my power consumption by switching off servers when it was proven they were never accessed... Are the both still equal now?

How, How,How

How do we monitor a teachers communication in a class room.

HOW.

How do we monitor the authority a teacher HAS.

we know all the thing you want to motior you have said it 4 times now

HOW are you going to do it WHAT will you put in place to do this

HOW will you get the results?

I'm sure you have heard of 360 reviews right? where a number of your collueages will answer questions on you and how you work.

these people tend to work along side you, they can see how you work on a daily basis, they see how you communicate with others, they see how you communicate with customers etc, they're not 6 yr old kids.

others teachers won't tend to see how another teacher delivers a session

how do get the data? how do we do it?|

not WHAT HOW. you get the difference right?

With what you would do with the linux engineers is fine, but you have a tangible way to gauge the performance, see there you gave a perfectly fine example where one can view the results.

now, how do we do that for teachers NOT WHAT. HOW

got it?

MaceFace

ntlbell wrote: »

why _might_ they have more anti social problems in inner city dublin?

Don't try to back out of it, just apoligise and move on.

Probably because it has more poverty which brings all the usual social problems:
http://www.movetoireland.com/movepag/misccrim.htm

ntlbell

MaceFace wrote: »

Probably because it has more poverty which brings all the usual social problems:
http://www.movetoireland.com/movepag/misccrim.htm

That shows crime rates, which would be obvious for any city of such size.

I don't see how a junkie from outside of D1/D2 robbing a hand bag on o connel st affects a pupil from an inner city school

Where is all the poverty around D1/2 ?

any stats on this?

Welease

ntlbell wrote: »

How, How,How

How do we monitor a teachers communication in a class room.

HOW.

How do we monitor the authority a teacher HAS.

we know all the thing you want to motior you have said it 4 times now

HOW are you going to do it WHAT will you put in place to do this

HOW will you get the results?

I'm sure you have heard of 360 reviews right? where a number of your collueages will answer questions on you and how you work.

these people tend to work along side you, they can see how you work on a daily basis, they see how you communicate with others, they see how you communicate with customers etc, they're not 6 yr old kids.

others teachers won't tend to see how another teacher delivers a session

how do get the data? how do we do it?|

not WHAT HOW. you get the difference right?

With what you would do with the linux engineers is fine, but you have a tangible way to gauge the performance, see there you gave a perfectly fine example where one can view the results.

now, how do we do that for teachers NOT WHAT. HOW

got it?

Are you serious?????

Probably in the same way other countries like the UK/USA and most of the western world implemented it.

Anonymous1987

Silverharp2 wrote: »

I'd start with the motorways, the airports, prisons, water supplies, ESB, RTE and An Post. Later on I'd sell the rights to all public roads to be maintained privately by residents or companies. I'd sell Bord Failte to the tourist industry, Fas to IBEC, Bord Bia to the farmers and BIM to the fishing industry. Not an inclusive list, I'm sure I missed a few.

Does the term natural monopoly mean anything to you? Some of your privatising ideas do sound interesting but lets not think that privatisation is some sort of efficiency magic trick.

Pete M.

My response to the original question would be to privatise none, but nationalise more.
Starting with the Corrib gas field.
The time for profiteering is over and we need to figure out a new way of running this country, fast.
It's time to mobe away from thinking that the best thing to do is to privatise and generate profits for shareholders, but to get a properly functioning and efficient public service on the job


How the hell are we going to move into a knowledge based economy, generating the well schooled, articulate graduates we need for an economy based on innovation if we continue to denigrate, downgrade and depress those responsible for their education?

Idbatterim

privatise the prison and escort service! Who gives a toss, if the quality for these scum goes down!

ntlbell

Welease wrote: »

Are you serious?????

Probably in the same way other countries like the UK/USA and most of the western world implemented it.

I'm serious, why can't you answer a simple question?

I have all ready explained and it's well documentated on the problems in the USA due to the preasure's on teahcers for results, the teachers move to teaching how to answer particular questions instead of teaching

can you do some research before you post anymore, as you're talking absoloute rubbish

Welease

ntlbell wrote: »

I'm serious, why can't you answer a simple question?

I have all ready explained and it's well documentated on the problems in the USA due to the preasure's on teahcers for results, the teachers move to teaching how to answer particular questions instead of teaching

can you do some research before you post anymore, as you're talking absoloute rubbish

As I said earlier if their plan is based on grade improvement alone, then they are getting the side effects of the goals they set for teachers. If your plan focusses on other goals, then you will get a different result. Wrong goal setting is unrelated to the implementation process of performance management. Maybe you should try to understand that before throwing insults around.

Why don't you take the couple of mins and go (for example) to teachernet and read up on the implementation of performance management there.
There is a wealth of information available on the net of the type of plans created, the measurement (both observational and data based) used and the review processes for teacher performance management.

Welease

ok let me try to explain this one final time becuase you are either just trying to have a pointless arguement or you are completely misunderstanding how performance management can work..

The process can be pretty similar around the world, but the specifics of plans (for example) will be based on the individual. (and this is just one implementation... you can implement any type of pm process).

Each year every individual teacher works with the head teacher create a performance plan for the year.. It can focus like the US primarily on grades, it could focus on behaviour and grades, it could focus on getting every kid to wear yellow... The detail is specific to the education systems goals and other personal factors like grade level, experience, strength's/weaknesses and expectations.

ACER suggests "including evidence relating to class environment, the teachers’ knowledge about the subject and how to teach it, student learning outcomes, and contributions to the school and profession".. which is what I stated numerous times in the list of (albeit poor) examples I gave.

They also suggest "Any single measure, such as measures of student achievement on standardised achievement tests, can’t provide a reliable basis for making performance-related pay decisions about individual teachers".. which as you said is one of the failings of the US system.. but that is because the US have decided to primarily focus on grades as an indicator of performance (which is what i have stated).. I never suggested a single focus.

The Bill Gates foundation (and other organisations) suggest a split of weighting across several goals.


Once the goals are in place.. you then implement a measurement system. The measurement system will depend on what the goals are that you are trying to track.. You want me to be specific.. thats impossible because the goals will vary across educations systems and specific teacher. As I stated previously it will be a combination of observed behaviour and data points (like grades etc)..

A review takes place at the end of the year to see how the specific teacher in relation to their goals..

If (for example) their goals were to ...
- Achieve an average grade of C in the class
- Spend 40 hours on extra cullicular activities
- Implement 2 schools projects
- Improve communication skills to X defined grade
- Have 0 parent escalations
- Develop 2 new teaching examples
- Increase student take up by 10% (if their subject is optional)
( just some bad examples)

The head teacher collates all the performance reviews for his/her staff, and then works in order from best to worst (obviously taking into account pay/experience grade level expectations).. and from there can assign pay rises based on your placing within the grouping... As I said, the process is not rocket science, and there is no point in my being specific on the plans or measurements because they will be individual.

It's basically how it's implemented across the world, and where issues occur its generally due to incorrect goal setting (as I said) rather than flawed process.

Make sense?

Eliot Rosewater

Pete M. wrote: »

efficient public service on the job

I don't think you can apply the adjective "efficient" to the "public sector". That's the reason for this thread. If the Government outsourced and/or privatized services the taxpayer would see improvements in service provision and cost.

Pete M. wrote: »

How the hell are we going to move into a knowledge based economy, generating the well schooled, articulate graduates we need for an economy based on innovation if we continue to denigrate, downgrade and depress those responsible for their education?

At the moment all the downgrading is being done by the Government, who insist upon ridiculous policies such as compulsory Irish and the consistent "dumbing down" of Leaving Cert standards.

Welease wrote: »

ok let me try to explain this one final time...

Good post. My father is a primary school teacher. I think basing performance on objective grades is impracticable, but there definitely are ways of measuring effectiveness. More on the spot inspections come to mind.

Anonymous1987

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

I don't think you can apply the adjective "efficient" to the "public sector". That's the reason for this thread. If the Government outsourced and/or privatized services the taxpayer would see improvements in service provision and cost.

Not necessarily (although it is the case in most circumstances) in some particular instances government ownership can provide services at a lower cost than the private sector, this is particularly true in the case of utilities.

Fol20

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Ok, the purpose of this thread is state which part of the public service could be sold off and run by a private company.

1) Passport office.
2) HSE Wedding Ceremonisers. They won't work Saturday so everyone going to a state wedding has to take a day off work because one person won't work on a Saturday.
3) RTE 2. See no reason why we need this station.
4) 2FM same as above.
5) Add your's here...

The passport office couldnt be privatized due to it being a national security risk.Foreign people could just pay their way into being irish:rolleyes:

ntlbell

Fol20 wrote: »

The passport office couldnt be privatized due to it being a national security risk.Foreign people could just pay their way into being irish:rolleyes:

It's outsourced in other countries AFAIK.

I don't see why having it privatley run it is any less security when you can currently by pa passport on the black market today anyway.

Cool Mo D

ntlbell wrote: »

It's outsourced in other countries AFAIK.

I don't see why having it privatley run it is any less security when you can currently by pa passport on the black market today anyway.

You can buy a FAKE passport on the black market. If you could get a genuine one under false pretenses, that would be a lot more dangerous.

PeakOutput

Cool Mo D wrote: »

You can buy a FAKE passport on the black market. If you could get a genuine one under false pretenses, that would be a lot more dangerous.

there wouldnt be a security issue private companies can be just as careful

NUIG_FiannaFail

Look at the banks and Insurance companies. They were all private.

simplistic2

NUIG_FiannaFail wrote: »

Look at the banks and Insurance companies. They were all private.

Your right they hijacked the state and the state hijacked the people.

The only answer is to privatize everything its far too dangerous to have a centralized power. It will inevitably be used to expand the power of the rich and keep the poor ignorant.

NapoleonInRags

On another part of this site there is a megathread dealing with unhappy customers who have paid good money in return for an appalling service (vodafone broadband).

The service provider has more or less ignored the comments and concerns of the customers involved and continues to provide an inefficient and ineffective service.

The scenario above is replicated time and time again in all aspects of commerce and trade. It amazes me therefore that so many people assume that Private Sector service provision automatically represents greater efficiency than the public sector.

PeakOutput

NapoleonInRags wrote: »

On another part of this site there is a megathread dealing with unhappy customers who have paid good money in return for an appalling service (vodafone broadband).

The service provider has more or less ignored the comments and concerns of the customers involved and continues to provide an inefficient and ineffective service.

The scenario above is replicated time and time again in all aspects of commerce and trade. It amazes me therefore that so many people assume that Private Sector service provision automatically represents greater efficiency than the public sector.

the mobile phone market is restricted by the goverment which in turn restricts competition so the big players dont have to have great customer service

Eliot Rosewater

NapoleonInRags wrote: »

It amazes me therefore that so many people assume that Private Sector service provision automatically represents greater efficiency than the public sector.

Unlike Government services, people can choose between private sector services. If one is unhappy with one's broadband service one can change provider (from Vodafone to O2, for example). In such a situation bad companies naturally lose revenue. They can either improve their service, or face eventual closure. In either scenario the presence of competition has made for a better overall service.

Also, any loss of efficiency in the private sphere is ideally shouldered by the specific risk takers alone. (Ideally, because sometimes the Government will step in and disperse the risk to every citizen in the country such as with NAMA.) As a result:

1. The general populace does not have to pay for others' mistakes. Contrast this with road building, where cost overruns are shouldered by taxpayers who had nothing to do with the overrun.
2. Because of 1, there is a large incentive for entrepreneurs to create the most cost effective and efficient service possible because they are the ones who pay for any lack of either.

This are some of the reasons why privatization is proposed. And remember the current state of the market is not a true representation of the free market due to Government regulation, as PeakOutput said.

NapoleonInRags

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

Unlike Government services, people can choose between private sector services. If one is unhappy with one's broadband service one can change provider (from Vodafone to O2, for example). In such a situation bad companies naturally lose revenue. They can either improve their service, or face eventual closure. In either scenario the presence of competition has made for a better overall service.

Also, any loss of efficiency in the private sphere is ideally shouldered by the specific risk takers alone. (Ideally, because sometimes the Government will step in and disperse the risk to every citizen in the country such as with NAMA.) As a result:

1. The general populace does not have to pay for others' mistakes. Contrast this with road building, where cost overruns are shouldered by taxpayers who had nothing to do with the overrun.
2. Because of 1, there is a large incentive for entrepreneurs to create the most cost effective and efficient service possible because they are the ones who pay for any lack of either.

This are some of the reasons why privatization is proposed. And remember the current state of the market is not a true representation of the free market due to Government regulation, as PeakOutput said.

My point was that bad and inefficient service is not simply a product of public or private ownership. Come on, we've all experienced dreadful services at the hands of both.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Welease

Neither public sector or private sector will bother to do a good job unless their are consequence for failing.

In the Private sector the consequence is usually loss of contracts/business. In the Public sector there is as of now, no consequence.

Both sectors are well capable of delivering excellence, but we as customers must demand it, and be willing to hold them accountable when we don't receive it.

Joey the lips

I agree... privatisation has worked so well in england and the us..... There is just the small matter of the billions that mr tax payer has to pay to upgrade the electrical and gas networks due to years of neglect.


On that note.... I reckon mary harneys ars@ should be privatised... after all we have already had a sizable chunk of it the last few years and its still not making a profit...

NapoleonInRags

Welease wrote: »

Neither public sector or private sector will bother to do a good job unless their are consequence for failing.

In the Private sector the consequence is usually loss of contracts/business. In the Public sector there is as of now, no consequence.

Both sectors are well capable of delivering excellence, but we as customers must demand it, and be willing to hold them accountable when we don't receive it.

A very fair point. However the flip side is that the rewards for doing a good job are present in the private sector but missing in public sector orgs.

There are may examples of excellent and improving services provided publicly (revenue springs to mind). However it is my experience that while the desire for efficiency and improvement is present in much of the public sector, the intransigence and obstructionist approach of the unions is a major obstacle to change.

Joey the lips

Welease wrote: »

Neither public sector or private sector will bother to do a good job unless their are consequence for failing.

In the Private sector the consequence is usually loss of contracts/business. In the Public sector there is as of now, no consequence.

Both sectors are well capable of delivering excellence, but we as customers must demand it, and be willing to hold them accountable when we don't receive it.

There is another flip side to this... The private sector is designed to make a profit so generall speaking it makes a limited number of products available at an expensive price then increases the products over time and lowers the price to get the remaining market. Its why poor paddy is last to have the playstation with the old games.

However the public service is designed to allow the poorer paddy benefit from the same products as the must have kids first.

Where the problems arise is these services cannot be delievered to many at a cheap price without being poor.

Its like macdonalds...

If you want it cheap and fast its not going to be good.
If you want it good and fast its not going to be cheap
If you good and cheap its not going to be fast.


Our public service due to volume which is increasing suffers from all 3 at times.

silverharp

Joey the lips wrote: »

However the public service is designed to allow the poorer paddy benefit from the same products as the must have kids first.

effectively its designed to waste money/scarce resources and be inefficient. Politics and economics make bad bedfellows. The irony is that a fully private health system for instance would provide more medical services at a cheaper cost then the current system. Think Aer Lingus 1970's v Ryanair 90's onwards.

P. Breathnach

Silverharp2 wrote: »

effectively its designed to waste money/scarce resources and be inefficient.

No. It's designed to deliver services. There may be flaws in the design or the implementation, but the intent is to deliver services.

Politics and economics make bad bedfellows.

That's no more than sloganeering. Like all aspects of life, there is a need to work out accommodations. And it's not necessarily the best thing that political needs or objectives should be wholly subordinated to profit imperatives.

The irony is that a fully private health system for instance would provide more medical services at a cheaper cost then the current system.

Maybe, maybe not. I would need to be convinced.

Think Aer Lingus 1970's v Ryanair 90's onwards.

I'm thinking Ryanair-style healthcare. It's a frightening prospect.