Denver schools superintendent Michael Bennet reported to be Salazar’s replacement.
By on Jan 2nd, 2009 at 1:30 pm
Denver schools superintendent Michael Bennet reported to be Salazar’s replacement.
Denver Public Schools superintendent Michael Bennet is expected to be named tomorrow by Gov. Bill Ritter (D) as the future replacement for Sen. Ken Salazar (D-CO), who is President-elect Barack Obama’s nominee to head the Interior Department. Bennet “won national attention for reforming a pay-for-performance teaching plan to boost incoming teachers’ salaries and increase bonuses for teachers who take tough assignments. His changes increased teacher support for the plan.”
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Bush
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Iraq
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
McCain
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Technology
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
We don’t need more leaders in Congress pushing pay for performance. There is a clear history of widespread cheating and suboptimization.
30% of stock options (the purest form of executive incentive compensation) were backdated.
Wall Street’s implosion was driven by greed and leverage. Incentive compensation and commissions played a huge role.
Leadership will be needed to cure America’s ills. Pay bribes will hurt much more than they help. Teachers and physicians are just as smart as CEO’s. Expect widespread cheating to meet the targets.
January 2nd, 2009 at 1:41 pmFor education oriented articles on this topic:
http://www.alfiekohn.org/articles.htm
January 2nd, 2009 at 1:47 pmI like this guy. Well done, Colorado.
January 2nd, 2009 at 1:49 pmActually if pay-for-performance had a much higher ceiling, I could get behind it. Republicans just use it as an excuse to slash teacher pay rather than to reward going above-and-beyond.
Interesting… if Obama pushes something like that, it could co-opt the Republican argument that school funding should be more meritocratic in order to give more funds to schools. That oughtta blow some gaskets.
January 2nd, 2009 at 1:56 pmI’m sure Mr. Bennett is as likeable as Ray LaHood. The problem is what they represent.
Bennett pushes the pay for performance myth. LaHood will ramp up infrastructure privatization, started by the Bush administration. Both systems optimize the system for a subunit.
Teacher pay is optimized at the expense of learning.
Corporate profits are optimized at the expense of the taxpayer.
January 2nd, 2009 at 1:57 pmIt says in the article that Bennet took a pay-for-performance teaching plan, and improved it such that teachers are now behind it.
January 2nd, 2009 at 1:59 pmThe premise of merit pay, and indeed of all rewards, is that people could be doing a better job but for some reason have decided to wait until it’s bribed out of them. This is as insulting as it is inaccurate.
Dangling a reward in front of teachers or principals—”Here’s what you’ll get if things somehow improve”— does nothing to address the complex, systemic factors that are actually responsible for educational deficiencies.
http://www.alfiekohn.org/teaching/edweek/meritpay.htm
Improving merit pay is like adding flavor to foul tasting medicine.
January 2nd, 2009 at 2:13 pmstateofthedivision,
I’m not saying I’m for merit pay, I’m simply saying that Bennet took something which is obviously already in place (likely put there by the voters), and worked with it to make it better for the teachers who have to work in the merit pay system.
He’s doing what he can with what he has.
January 2nd, 2009 at 2:17 pmWe all do what we can. I just hate to see the same sorry leadership that took Wall Street to rubble invade education and health care.
Arne Duncan and Micheal Bennett will have high bully pulpits to push their system of bribes.
January 2nd, 2009 at 2:23 pmIt’s possible that when Mr Bennet is a Senator, he’ll have more power and influence to change the system.
January 2nd, 2009 at 2:49 pmNothing like having your own Senator in your pocket…
This jackass was, for years, PERSONAL ASSISTANT to Phillip Anschutz, the multi-billionaire financier…. before Anschutz bought his way into the school system in Denver and now the US Senate..
REAL BAD CHOICE…..
January 2nd, 2009 at 3:02 pmWinski, thank you for the information about Bennett’s background. I found this on the DenverPost. Michael served as:
a corporate turnaround expert for Denver businessman Philip Anschutz’s investment company.
Anshutz is virulently homophobic and spreads his considerable wealth in such causes.
January 2nd, 2009 at 3:14 pmWhy is it that nothing makes any of you happy. The TEACHERS like his plan. Sorry, but I’m going to take the teacher’s word for his efficacy on htis matter. Second, since when is anti gay marriage virulently homophobic? Anschultz doesn’t want marriage defined down. I happen to agree with him. I’m not afraid of gays, I’m anti special rights. Letting gays marry is a special right. People in this country can’t marry someone of the same sex, a sibling or first cousin and I think that’s a good thing.
January 2nd, 2009 at 3:27 pma colorado caller to ed schultz earlier had NO good things to say about this guy and the way he ran those schools…
sorry – i’ve forgotten the specifics…
January 2nd, 2009 at 3:38 pmOk, I’m just going by the linked articles. I don’t know anything about this man.
If nothing else, he’ll be a “D” in the Senate.
January 2nd, 2009 at 3:52 pmdrew3rd Says:
January 2nd, 2009 at 3:27 pm
Asinine off topic gay marriage drivel.
**yawn**
January 2nd, 2009 at 3:53 pmI’m anti special rights.
i’d bet not really… don’t think too hard…
Letting gays marry is a special right.
NOT letting gays marry is a special discrimination…
just sayin’…
January 2nd, 2009 at 3:56 pmdrew3rd Says:
Why is it that nothing makes any of you happy. The TEACHERS like his plan. Sorry, but I’m going to take the teacher’s word for his efficacy on htis matter.
Yeah, I’m going to agree with you on this one. Typically when I hear “merit pay” regarding education, it’s just an excuse to de-fund education. Kind of like when the word “reform” comes out of a Republican’s mouth, you can make more sense of what he’s saying by substituting the word “destroy.” But in this case, it sounds like something I’m willing to give the benefit of the doubt to.
drew3rd Says:
Second, since when is anti gay marriage virulently homophobic?
Since when was anti civil rights virulently racist? Same thing.
January 2nd, 2009 at 4:58 pmdrew3rd you need to watch your words in these parts.
Fact is if Doctor King came back to life today and told people he was against gay marriage some people here would pull a Nader and call him an Uncle Tom.
As for Bennet I’d like to see at least a second source that says the teachers aprove of his pay system before I support it.
January 2nd, 2009 at 6:21 pmTeachers appreciated his increase in base pay, which is not pay for performance. That’s a salary increase.
As for the bonuses and incentive pay, that generally requires an internal study. I haven’t seen results yet.
January 2nd, 2009 at 6:44 pmMerit pay for teachers goes many ways. In October 1957, the Soviet Union launched the first Earth satellite. By the next semester in High School, there were academic programs injected that enlisted such august institutions as Stanford and MIT. My physics teacher had offerings from both institutions. They ranged from simple experiments from MIT to advanced mathematics from Stanford. That physics teacher sent 100% of his students to college and 25% to advanced degrees. All graduated. He was offered the opportunity to deliver tools that aroused wonder in his students. The key issue is that he took full advantage of that opportunity. What made him a good teacher is that he grasped at that once in a lifetime advantage. Most educators let that edge sift through their fingers like sand at a beach. He got nothing for his efforts.
January 2nd, 2009 at 7:01 pmcd Says:
drew3rd you need to watch your words in these parts.
Fact is if Doctor King came back to life today and told people he was against gay marriage some people here would pull a Nader and call him an Uncle Tom.
Nah, those are the kinds of terms wingnuts prefer to use. I personally save that one in particular for Clarence Thomas alone.
And there’s really nothing stopping drew3rd from saying whatever he wants. God knows nothing’s ever stopped him before.
.
cd Says:
As for Bennet I’d like to see at least a second source that says the teachers aprove of his pay system before I support it.
As always, it’s a little more complicated than just “for/against.” They like the money, but don’t like giving up tenure.
January 2nd, 2009 at 9:16 pmPretty loose with your “Facts” there cd. Do you get some kind of bonus right wing points for mentioning Dr. King, Nader, Uncle Tom and gay marriage in the same sentence? Better give your keyboard a break while you try to think up some other bullshit to spew. It probably overheated on that one.
January 3rd, 2009 at 12:07 amJanuary 3rd, 2009 at 12:07 am
Are you really ignorant of Nader’s calling Obama an Uncle Tom?
January 3rd, 2009 at 1:27 amElBruce I’m going to think about what you said and get back to you.
January 3rd, 2009 at 1:28 amFirst, Posts 11 and 12 referred to Bennet’s affiliation with Phillip Anschultz who is supportive of anti-gay marriage issues. That is what I was referring to. The idea that he is virulently homophobic because he wants marriage to remain the domain of one man and one woman as it has been for the past 2000 years when Christ instituted it? That isn’t virulently homophobic, it’s well reasoned.
Second, gay marriage is not a civil rights issue ElBruce, it’s a special rights issue. Gays are able to enjoy any of the benefits married couples enjoy. They just can’t get married. You can’t marry someone of the same sex, a sibling or first cousin. These are reasonable laws. Not civil rights issues.
January 3rd, 2009 at 7:41 amcd, I write nothing of which I am ashamed. People are free to disagree with me, I disagree with them. That’s why we are here. I appreciate your concern but I am a big boy and can sift through good posts and bad. Typically, ElBruce is a very intelligent poster, although, I can’t recall very many times he or I have agreed. I like to see other points of view and this is a pretty good place. A little anti-semitic for my tastes, but I’m enjoying myself thus far.
January 3rd, 2009 at 7:46 amkaty, what sort of logic is that? Not letting me do whatever I want is special discrimination according to that logic.
January 3rd, 2009 at 7:48 amdrew3rd:
January 3rd, 2009 at 9:34 amNot that it has anything to do with the topic but did I miss the place where you explain just why gays shouldn’t be allowed to marry. What difference would it make? How would it effect nongay marriage?
cd @ #24, you’re slipping. You forgot to work Dr. King and gays into your spew. Although you did add Obama. Maybe you can think really hard and get Clinton in the sentence. And a Blagojevich mention will get bonus points. Ok, try really hard now. And be sure to stay totally off topic or you lose points.
January 3rd, 2009 at 11:10 amJanuary 3rd, 2009 at 11:10 am
Does it not bother you that Nader’s starting to sound like David Duke?
January 3rd, 2009 at 11:32 amcd, point off. You are off topic, dropped almost all names and only added David Duke. Remedial work for you. If you can’t get it together I will have to flunk you. Sorry to be so harsh but maybe it will help you learn. And you didn’t even bring Clinton into it. Sigh, our trolls are going down the drain.
January 3rd, 2009 at 12:51 pmI’ll take that as a no.
January 3rd, 2009 at 1:22 pmMore points off for making invalid assumptions. Take it any way you like because it is your assumption and not what I said, very bad form. If you want to have a real discussion, try not starting off with accusations and be on topic. There are a lot of folks here who are willing to have a good discussion. Your post in this thread started off on a confrontational note. The posters I know here might express opposition to points but not in the way you framed it. Your post contained race baiting and gay bashing. Those are two VERY RIGHT WING memes and expect to get tweeked for making such asinine statements. If you wish to have a real discussion try following these simple rules:
1. Be on topic
2. Be prepared to back up your statements with real facts
3. Do not make assumptions for others
4.
January 3rd, 2009 at 2:12 pmlol
Your repeated references to yourself as an authority figure is just too pathetic for me to continue wasting my time on you.
January 3rd, 2009 at 10:29 pmAnd you showed such promise in other threads. Keep trying though as there may be hope for you yet. And don’t let references scare you. You can actually use them to support your statements. Give it a try. And above all, try to be coherent. Your statement @ #35 makes zero sense. Read the post @ #34 and try really hard to have it sink in. If it is too hard to take all at once, try one at at time.
January 4th, 2009 at 12:21 amI worked for three years as a teacher under Bennet and he is a catatrophe. He is anti teacher and anti union. He believes in the corporate model of education where students are products. He plays money games like giving one time bonuses and claiming it as a salry increase. He blackmails teachers into giving up there rights like tenure and union representation. worse he is anti-creativity. at a meeting at our high school when his assistant allowed that a teacher should be able to use his own creativity and judgement in implementing the teaching of the standards, Bennet cut hyim off to express that no a teacher is to follow standard and approved methods of teaching and no freelancing. He went on to tell a story of what if a teacher woke up one day and decided she wanted to teach about butterflys. We have to make sure she teaches the topics assigned in the curriculum in the order and manner mandated or else we cant insure that the things we want taught get taught. Me I want to send my child to the school with the teacher who wants to do butterflies, the kids will feel her dedication exitement and bliss – they will learn much more than just the facts maam , they will be touched. sucessful people always remember that one teacher that fired them up. as a collegue once said will a person ever say ” remember that day when teacher taught us standard four slash 7 part b?
January 11th, 2009 at 1:00 am