It is often said that what is good for the goose is good for the gander. That is why 23 states have initiated merit pay programs that reward teachers who improve student performance on state tests. Proponents of bonuses argue that if corporations provide bonus pay for high-performing employees, schools should as well.

The federal government just distributed $42 million of the $94 million set aside for a Teacher Incentive Fund aimed at teachers who raise test scores of students in at-risk school districts. Texas has allocated $300 million for a bonus program and Florida $150 million. The superintendent of the Houston School District uses the bonus program to attract high-performing teachers. He says, “Anytime I can put a high-performing teacher in front of the classroom, that is good for kids.” Since the program began, standardized test scores have gone up 10 points in Houston.

A debate seems to be raging in the Motherland over whether parents should have email and text messaging contact with their children’s teachers. According to the London Times, the government wants to encourage such communication in hopes that it would result in greater parent involvement in educational matters and allow parents to more closely monitor their children’s progress. It would facilitate more timely responses to parents’ concerns rather than having to wait for infrequently scheduled teacher-parent conferences. The government cites studies that show that the single most important factor in a student’s educational success is parent involvement. On the flip side, schools could text message parents when their children are truant.

Opposition could come from teacher union leaders, who are concerned about teacher privacy and additional strain on teacher workloads. There is also the possibility of abusive messaging. Government spokespersons say these issues have been considered and can be addressed without adding hardship to teachers.

Keep your eye on this issue as it will most certainly work itself across the pond and into school districts throughout America.

Remember the summit on school violence called by President Bush following a rash of school shootings? Does anyone know of any follow-up plans or a concrete outcome of the conference? Personally, I have not heard anything in the past few months, although I am quite certain the violence has not subsided.

As we begin a new year, the fate of reauthorization for NCLB looms in a cloud of uncertainty. While most of us would agree that the intent of the bill is good, there are many aspects of the program that opponents claim have proven ineffective. Probably no tenet has garnered more criticism than that of mandated testing. The varying degrees of rigor in testing from state to state cause critics to question use of test results to determine funding. They also criticize the alleged spending of only $20 out of $8,000 per student on test development. Opposition is also centered around statistics that show fewer than 1% of students transfer out of low-performing schools. Teacher training designed to improve the quality of instruction has fallen far short of expectations, and few of the low-performing schools are actually restructuring as required under the law. It should prove to be an interesting debate, and with the so-called “do-nothing-Congress” being replaced by a democratic majority, the outcome could be even more uncertain.

With the holiday season passed and all those gifts you received from students tucked away, one wonders about the future of gift giving for the next holiday season. Things I never questioned when I was a teacher are now being debated. Should gift giving by students be discouraged, banned, or have limits placed upon it?

It is not hard to understand why the practice is being debated. Many educators have found it disturbing to see the gift-giving tradition, which has existed as long as schools, threatened. The most easy-to-understand criticism has to do with the fact that poorer children feel pressured by being unable to purchase gifts at costs equal to those of their classmates. There is also the concern that favored teachers may receive an armload of gifts while other teachers receive nothing.

Some school boards have placed limits on the amount of gifting. Los Angeles, for example, limits the value of a gift from a single source to $100. A further rule prohibits gifts of material value. Hmm, if a gift of just under $100 is acceptable, I have to wonder what they mean by material value. Material value is apparently undefined by the Board of Education. Some schools across the country have adopted holiday funds to which parents can contribute. The collections in such funds are equally divided among the teachers.

What is the strangest gift you have ever received from a student?