Originally Posted by Unregistered

The scenario is not simply a comparison between teaching high needs vs low needs class.

The situation on the ground is that different teachers hold different types of portfolios, as different as apples and oranges. But management seems to prefer apple or orange over the other.

For example, take a comparison of 2 teachers of same age and same paygrade.

Teacher A:
Due to manpower shortage in the department, need to take on additional classes and graduating classes. Timetable is overloaded. In other areas, just an ordinary committee member, ordinary CCA teacher.
Burn 80h weeks doing T&L related stuff (lessons, homework marking, exam-related stuff, testimonial, additional classes for grad classes)

Teacher B:
Normal class load, or maybe lower, and appointment as CCA OIC and committee head/2ic. Placed in charge to plan and lead a major school event, for example, NE week leading up to national day, or organise the school's anniversary celebration and coordinating with the VIPs attending the event. Also burn 80h work weeks doing all these stuff.

In terms of time and effort, both teachers are definitely not slacking, and are working too hard.
But when it comes to appraisal, teacher B will be favoured over teacher A, because the system deems such non-academic work as being 'more impactful'.
Which is not necessarily true.

Just because an event involved the entire school population, got VIPs involved, it doesn't make it more important than learning in the classroom.

At the end of the day, if we ask the real stakeholders, the parents and students, if they were to choose to between lessons and school event, which would they think is more important, the answer is quite obvious.

The priorities are severely misplaced in the appraisal of teachers.