You're a bit confused. It was the rationalist school that got displaced by the behavioral school. Neoclassical economics is more macro- and market-based, i.e. Keynesian economics; it doesn't really concern itself with individual behavior.
I was under the impression that neoclassical economics used the perfectly utility maximizing, information gathering and selfish agent as an assumption. I also thought that Keynesian economics was mutually exclusive from neoclassical economics, although I may be confusing the chicago school with neoclassical. I don't know much about the history of economics.
More money would go a long way to fix that, as well as provide a nice bonus for the brave souls that have stuck around this long.
Do most teachers cite lack of money as a reason for the high turnover rate? Just in your description it seems more like the poor working conditions accounts for the high turnover rate. Wouldn't that mean it'd be better for money to be spent on, let's say class prep labor saving devices (Dunno, a full time TA who helps grade, a nationally approved curriculum/syllabus that could be modified for individual classes or something like that) instead of teacher salaries?
pay/incentives/etc for teachers is ALREADY based way too much on how long youre there, which is, well, stupid and nonsensical. pay the teachers who are the best at what they do, like, you know, every other career
How do you know this is true? I know several airline companies which base pay almost exclusively on rank, and that Enron based it on merit. This isn't a conclusive sample but it does tell me that: 1) Basing pay off of merits could lead to perverse incentives which lead to the fall of enron and 2) at least some long time companies base pay off of rank and have not failed yet. Whether it's a major factor is unknown.
--
You're messing with me! You're messing with me, aren't you!?
You're making fun of me, aren't you!? Aren't you!? You definitely are! I'll murder you!