Though it would be more effective to directly read and apply pedagogical research instead of pulling in vaguely similar stuff from the field of writing and theater as the author does. For example, much of what the original article says matches pedagogy literature e.g. if I look at 'Learning and Motivation in the Postsecondary Classroom' by Svinicki chapter 7 about goal-oriented motivation for learning or 'Making Learning Whole' by Perkins chapter 7 about reasons and ways to 'put the learner in driver's seat' then this seems to say similar things as this article only in more detail and with some evidence basis.
There is no need to reinvent the wheel - we have a whole discipline of science dedicated to researching what works best for learning and instruction, it just needs to be applied.
This is the vibe I got as well. Which is fair enough (to each his/her own), but I thought I'd mention fast.ai which takes the opposite approach:
> Harvard professor David Perkins, who wrote Making Learning Whole (Jossey-Bass), has much to say about teaching. The basic idea is to teach the whole game. That means that if you're teaching baseball, you first take people to a baseball game or get them to play it. You don't teach them how to wind twine to make a baseball from scratch, the physics of a parabola, or the coefficient of friction of a ball on a bat.
[0] See: "Making Learning Whole" by David Perkins
http://norvig.com/experiment-design.html
(By the way, the scatter of data points around the regression line in their plot suggests that the model is subject to large degrees of error in prediction.) It would take an experimental design (randomly assigning one group of teachers in the same country to receive pay raises while another group does not, with before-and-after comparisons of pupil performance) to show that paying teachers more results in higher pupil performance.
http://escholarship.org/uc/item/6hb3k0nz
There have been hundreds of studies of educational interventions over the years,
http://www.amazon.com/Visible-Learning-Synthesis-Meta-Analys...
and many thoughtful international comparisons of teaching practice,
http://www.amazon.com/Teaching-Gap-Improving-Education-Class...
http://www.amazon.com/Knowing-Teaching-Elementary-Mathematic...
http://www.amazon.com/Making-Learning-Whole-Principles-Trans...
but none of those conclude that simply raising teacher pay, without changing teaching practices and perhaps also the composition of the teaching workforce, will have much to do with raising pupil performance in any place. Raising teacher pay systematically has been tried in the United States (notably in the state of Connecticut) and has not been shown to markedly raise pupil performance.
An economist who closely studies education policy has suggested that pay and other incentives be used to encourage the least effective teachers to seek other occupations while rewarding the most effective teachers with increased compensation and more professional support.
http://edpro.stanford.edu/hanushek/admin/pages/files/uploads...
Such a policy, he estimates (showing his work in his article) would raise United States educational achievement to the level of the highest-performing countries. This is something worth verifying by experiment, although that will be politically difficult in any state of the United States
http://www.cato.org/pubs/journal/cj30n1/cj30n1-8.pdf
and perhaps in Britain as well.
http://www.economist.com/node/17849199
P.S. I'm curious about why the United States underperforms so much compared to salaries paid to teachers in the chart shown in the submitted blog post.
