AS the tired, acrimonious dance of teacher pay negotiations plays out, it may be worth revisiting some embedded views. One is that it is not possible to measure teacher performance. I disagree. I have always felt it is broadly possible to categorise the classroom performance of individual teachers as either outstanding, good, adequate or inadequate.
The real issues are determining what to measure and how to measure it and who measures it. The key constraint is the time and effort required to obtain reasonably objective data and observations about individual teacher performance.
In the prehistoric days there were school inspectors whose job was to observe individual teachers and pass judgment on their suitability for advancement. They also had a more subtle role of sharing best practice and giving professional guidance.
This was abolished decades ago. The task of teacher appraisal was then thrown on schools. ERO judges the overall school performance not individual teachers. A losing battle for those schools who struggle to attract good teachers. But the current incentive structure for individual teachers is sad. For a start, there is little extra time or remuneration given to a supervisory teacher to collect objective data.
If a teacher is inadequate in their performance, then a derogatory appraisal leads to a disaffected sullen staff member. If a teacher is outstanding in their role, there is no immediate return. Just a pat on the back and the likelihood of larger classes and more responsibility next year.