Alright,
Let's add to the teacher pay argument....
If you scroll down, you can see my argument for a new teacher pay system. You can also see Mr. Jaworski's comments. I agree with quite a bit that he said. I'll point out some things that might be interesting.
1. I agree that tenure doesn't make much sense for anyone under higher ed. If tenure only meant due process and collective bargaining, I would be fine with it. Really, those are the only things I would want/need. Automatic job security doesn't do anyone any good.
2. Sure, the suburbs are just a representation and don't have the issues as urban or even some rural districts. Incentives would be fine for those districts. I agree.
5. I stand by my opinion that teachers need to prove over time their excellence. One year is not a good indicator, positive or negative. Maybe the bench mark could be smaller, but I still feel payments should happen over the period of years with larger increases then quicker advancement with smaller increments.
I'm not sure how the unions are going to respond to this, especially the NEA. I've also had some interesting convos with older teachers at my school. I wish more young teachers were involved in the debate and I wish they were actually working in the schools and not just working in policy or wonks writing papers.
8.16.2009
8.11.2009
Lollapalooza 2009
Yes, it was insane. Check out MSTRKRFT. They were nuts.
Here's how they ended, epic.
Actually, this was last....
Here's how they ended, epic.
Actually, this was last....
8.07.2009
Quick Follow-up...
Coincidentally, a friend of mine from U of I was let go of her job in L.A. due to budget cuts. A columnist for the L.A. Times wrote a story about it. Here it is.
It's a quick read and doesn't necessarily reflect my views on teacher performance and tenure. But, I want to direct your attention to the comments section of the column. People have some very definite opinions on tenure and its place in education. I point this out to illustrate the complexity that this issue has professionally and politically.
-NJ
It's a quick read and doesn't necessarily reflect my views on teacher performance and tenure. But, I want to direct your attention to the comments section of the column. People have some very definite opinions on tenure and its place in education. I point this out to illustrate the complexity that this issue has professionally and politically.
-NJ
8.06.2009
Another Perspective on Performance Pay and Let's Talk about Tenure
I've always been a fan of performance pay for teachers. It makes complete sense to me. Part of that might be because my Mom worked in a school district that uses a points system to help establish pay increases. She has said that the system felt fair and that there was a way for teachers to appeal how many points they received that year, but that her building principal had told her that nobody had ever utilized it (another indication of it's perceived fairness).
Apparently, that district is in the process of changing their merit pay system - with input from teachers and community members. Check it out here (it's actually interesting).
I appreciate Mr. Collins' discussion of this topic. I'm going to quickly hit each of his talking points and add my own thoughts - all in the name of a good discussion. You can reference his thoughts on the post below.
1) I'm still not sold on the idea of tenure in K-12 education. I can clearly see a need for a tenure system at a research institution like the University of Illinois - professors are doing research and need to know they can publish controversial findings without any retribution. What's the equivalency in a middle school?
I've heard the argument that tenure protects the more experienced teachers (read: expensive) from being fired as a way to save costs and tt also encourages teachers to stick around knowing they have some job security. I can see some validity in those points, but administrators and school boards DO want to keep GOOD teachers - it reflects positively on them to have the community see that they're keeping good teachers that are educating their students. And, with a merit pay system in place, it would become the responsibility of administrators to hold their teachers accountable for their effectiveness. I think a positive, effective work environment is the key to keeping teachers around (especially if money is not an incentive, as Mr. Collins claims).
2) True. Teachers don't enter teaching to become rich. However, for a large percentage of the country, an average teacher salary isn't enough - they want/need more (depending on a large variety of factors) and probably think that fact a lot. If you provided them with a way to make more money in the long term, they will do it - just like the type 75 certifications. If you tell them that they can make more money by being a "better" teacher, you don't think that would be an incentive? Keep in mind that not everybody works in a suburban Chicago school where teachers MIGHT make enough money for a small increase to simply "not be worth it".
3) Yes, hard work and excellence MUST be rewarded.
4) This system sounds interesting. I'd be for it.
5) I don't necessarily like the idea that incremental increases can't be made every year in your salary. Couldn't you just make the benchmarks smaller? That's a better way to gauge how a teacher is doing - in my opinion - as opposed to having a benchmark a few years off and hoping that it all works out.
In the end, I think that we agree that the system needs to change and it sounds like Mr. Collins is PRO merit pay in SOME fashion. I guess most of my resistance is to the idea of tenure. I just feel that having some sort of merit system is a better way to reward the teachers you want to keep.
Bring on the comments!
Mr. J
Apparently, that district is in the process of changing their merit pay system - with input from teachers and community members. Check it out here (it's actually interesting).
I appreciate Mr. Collins' discussion of this topic. I'm going to quickly hit each of his talking points and add my own thoughts - all in the name of a good discussion. You can reference his thoughts on the post below.
1) I'm still not sold on the idea of tenure in K-12 education. I can clearly see a need for a tenure system at a research institution like the University of Illinois - professors are doing research and need to know they can publish controversial findings without any retribution. What's the equivalency in a middle school?
I've heard the argument that tenure protects the more experienced teachers (read: expensive) from being fired as a way to save costs and tt also encourages teachers to stick around knowing they have some job security. I can see some validity in those points, but administrators and school boards DO want to keep GOOD teachers - it reflects positively on them to have the community see that they're keeping good teachers that are educating their students. And, with a merit pay system in place, it would become the responsibility of administrators to hold their teachers accountable for their effectiveness. I think a positive, effective work environment is the key to keeping teachers around (especially if money is not an incentive, as Mr. Collins claims).
2) True. Teachers don't enter teaching to become rich. However, for a large percentage of the country, an average teacher salary isn't enough - they want/need more (depending on a large variety of factors) and probably think that fact a lot. If you provided them with a way to make more money in the long term, they will do it - just like the type 75 certifications. If you tell them that they can make more money by being a "better" teacher, you don't think that would be an incentive? Keep in mind that not everybody works in a suburban Chicago school where teachers MIGHT make enough money for a small increase to simply "not be worth it".
3) Yes, hard work and excellence MUST be rewarded.
4) This system sounds interesting. I'd be for it.
5) I don't necessarily like the idea that incremental increases can't be made every year in your salary. Couldn't you just make the benchmarks smaller? That's a better way to gauge how a teacher is doing - in my opinion - as opposed to having a benchmark a few years off and hoping that it all works out.
In the end, I think that we agree that the system needs to change and it sounds like Mr. Collins is PRO merit pay in SOME fashion. I guess most of my resistance is to the idea of tenure. I just feel that having some sort of merit system is a better way to reward the teachers you want to keep.
Bring on the comments!
Mr. J
8.01.2009
Performance Pay for Teachers
I used to be a huge fan. I don't like the current system, that's not a secret, but I think the changes needed are tremendous. Let me attempt to outline my points.
1. Tenure should only outline due process. There are to many obstacles for getting rid of poor teachers. Michelle Rhee in DC discovered that and has made the issue much more......public. Simply put, its too easy to get rid of non-tenured teachers, and too difficult to get rid of tenured ones.
2. Teachers enter the profession despite the pay. Teachers in the suburbs are payed well for the most part, teachers in urban, under-funded schools are severely underpaid. But, again, no one really uses this as a reason to enter teaching. People enter finance and business for reasons that could be considered much more financially motivated. Thus, incentives shouldn't be a large part of the teacher salary equation.
3. That being said, hard work and excellence should be rewarded in some way. The only incentive right now is to become more educated with degrees that don't necessarily pertain to what actually goes on in the classroom. Yes, I'm talking about the influx of people getting their Type 75 certification.
4. I think a teacher's salary should remain the same for the first two years. The only hoops they should need to get through would be getting used to their job and becoming better in the classroom. If the school decides to re-new their contract, they receive a large salary increase and begin work on a three year plan become tenured. In this they will have work towards goals outlined by their particular department. (This is much similar to a college tenure process). A community of teachers serve as their 'committee' and take them through the process. Their pay remains the same for three years with a very large boost after tenure.
5. At this point, benchmarks are delegated at specific points. Yes, that means you can't just get paid more every year. Pay increases coincide with these benchmarks.
Obviously this is a dream scenario, there's plenty wrong with it. The current system makes sense and works fine. I'm just trying to shred some ideas. My opinion on this has changed over the course of the summer.
1. Tenure should only outline due process. There are to many obstacles for getting rid of poor teachers. Michelle Rhee in DC discovered that and has made the issue much more......public. Simply put, its too easy to get rid of non-tenured teachers, and too difficult to get rid of tenured ones.
2. Teachers enter the profession despite the pay. Teachers in the suburbs are payed well for the most part, teachers in urban, under-funded schools are severely underpaid. But, again, no one really uses this as a reason to enter teaching. People enter finance and business for reasons that could be considered much more financially motivated. Thus, incentives shouldn't be a large part of the teacher salary equation.
3. That being said, hard work and excellence should be rewarded in some way. The only incentive right now is to become more educated with degrees that don't necessarily pertain to what actually goes on in the classroom. Yes, I'm talking about the influx of people getting their Type 75 certification.
4. I think a teacher's salary should remain the same for the first two years. The only hoops they should need to get through would be getting used to their job and becoming better in the classroom. If the school decides to re-new their contract, they receive a large salary increase and begin work on a three year plan become tenured. In this they will have work towards goals outlined by their particular department. (This is much similar to a college tenure process). A community of teachers serve as their 'committee' and take them through the process. Their pay remains the same for three years with a very large boost after tenure.
5. At this point, benchmarks are delegated at specific points. Yes, that means you can't just get paid more every year. Pay increases coincide with these benchmarks.
Obviously this is a dream scenario, there's plenty wrong with it. The current system makes sense and works fine. I'm just trying to shred some ideas. My opinion on this has changed over the course of the summer.
Back from summer
I'm back everyone. This summer, although its not over, has been quick. I went whitewater rafting for the first time up in Carbondale, CO. I hiked to the Maroon Bells in Aspen. I taught down at Smith Walbridge. Now I have WAY too much to do. I got a phone call from school everyday on vacation. With the major transitions currently taking place, I knew that it would happen. Oh well, such is life. I promise to get back on track here now that I'm back.
The Dream
Illinois vs. Northwestern at Wrigley in 2010? Ah, yeah. Dueling pianos at Sluggers afterward anyone?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
