|
Teachers wary of performance-based pay
by Kandi Baylor · News · January 03, 2007
State likely to bump Iowa salaries up from 40th in the nation
When the session begins on Monday, the Iowa Legislature may consider plans to link teacher salaries to performance. But performance-based pay faces an uncertain future. Governor-elect Chet Culver, a former social studies teacher, says Iowa’s teachers have already performed well enough to be paid better than 40th in the nation. Polls show that Iowans are divided on the issue of performance-based pay for teachers.
In a recent article in the Des Moines Register, Culver said, “This idea that we need to make teachers jump through more hoops and over additional hurdles to get them to the national average (in pay) is, I think, a little bit overdone.”
Retired West Branch kindergarten teacher Sheila Dalton agrees. “I think it is deplorable that Iowa, which consistently ranks among the highest-scoring states in the nation in standardized testing, pays their teachers one of the lowest salaries in the nation,” she said. “Hopefully, with a teacher in the governorship, we will begin to see some improvements in these salaries.”
The traditional pay system for teachers in the United States dates back to 1921, when it was introduced in Des Moines, according to Allen Odden, director of the Consortium for Policy Research in Education at the University of Wisconsin. Teachers have climbed the “step” system, earning pay increases based on years of service and education levels.
Originally, motivation for the “step” system was to equalize salaries. Female teachers were making less than male teachers, minorities less than whites and elementary teachers less than high school teachers. The step system encouraged teachers to get a bachelor’s and eventually master’s degrees.
In Iowa specifically, it means teachers are paid an average salary just under $41,000, ranking them 40th in the nation for 2005-06, according to the National Education Association. That’s up slightly from 42nd in 2004-05.
Teacher pay proposals
Linking teacher pay to performance is just one of several alternative structures. Alternative teacher compensation systems also include:
1) Merit pay, in which individual teachers receive bonuses based on improvements in their performance.
2) Knowledge and skill-based pay, in which teachers earn permanent increases for acquiring new skills and applying those skills.
3) School-based performance pay, in which all professional staff in a school earn a bonus if students meet particular goals.
4) Performance pay, in which teachers earn increases tied to improvements in students’ performance — typically measured by standardized tests or other criteria.
There are multiple hurdles to clear before confidence in any change in pay structure can be gained. Performance pay studies are expected to result in 10 pilot projects, costing $2.5 million, that will begin in Iowa school districts in the fall. The plan is expected to expand to 20 pilot projects, costing $5 million the following year, according to the Des Moines Register.
The Legislature’s new pilot projects have drawn criticism because such projects have been launched before without success. An alternative teacher pay plan was launched in 1987 and again in 2001, but neither was ever fully financed or implemented. Another concern is that basing pay on student performance might not be fair, as it may not account for student factors. It is hard to determine what a teacher contributes to test scores.
According to one West Branch Middle School teacher, “Performance-based pay would be a good idea if every class was exactly the same and you would be able to see the improvements or lack of. You have classes with different abilities and problems as they come through. Since all classes aren’t the same, it would be tough to judge each class’ improvement. You might have a hard-to-manage class and have made great strides, but wouldn’t get paid for their improvement because they weren’t the best. It’s something I really hope they think through before they put in to action.”
High school art teacher Rose Judge is concerned that performance-based pay “has been proposed for teachers more than once. Pilot programs are developed and when it becomes clear that it will be very costly, it simply fails to materialize.”
The value of teachers
Sara Oswald, principal at West Branch Middle School, agrees with Culver that “all teachers need more pay ... period.” But Oswald shares the concern of thoughtful planning before a process is implemented.
“Are parents and community members going to support more money for schools?” she asked.
There are people who think teachers make too much as it is, because they “only work nine months out of the year.” This is a common misconception, according to many teachers. In fact, state law mandates that teachers’ pay be based on nine months but paid over 12. For many teachers, not having a job in the summer feels more like unemployment than it does like a vacation.
“Half of my staff have a second job, just to pay their bills,” said Oswald. “Many teachers leave Iowa to go to other states where the pay is better without having to jump through hoops.”
West Branch parent and PTO member Melissa Russell believes the issue extends even beyond teachers.
“Teachers do not get paid enough. People that take care of children in general do not get paid well,” she said.
Dalton adds, “It has always baffled me that those folks who work most directly with our children (teachers, day care workers, etc.) are so poorly compensated for their work, when obviously, children are prized and treasured.”
Butch Pedersen, who teaches physical education and learning strategies at West Branch High School, feels that society in general needs to be educated on just what teachers do for kids.
“Teachers are highly underpaid and under-appreciated,” Pedersen said. “The old ‘you only work nine months a year’ tag we get is just a foolish thing to say. Many teachers help kids out 24-7 at any hour of the day. We are on call every day of our lives. We are not 8 o’clock to 4 o’clock workers, and we do bring kids’ problems home with us because we care.”
Russell observes that even our community is representative of the larger problem of putting our youth first.
“Not only are our teachers and day care providers paid poorly — we don’t have a gym or facilities and programs to benefit the kids in this community,” Russell said. “It goes beyond education. We don’t put money into things for the children.”
This isn’t the first time
In 2005, the Iowa Legislature created the Institute for Tomorrow’s Workforce (ITW) to develop a plan of action and make recommendations to improve Iowa’s education system. ITW hired Learning Point Associates (LPA), a nationally recognized educational consulting firm, to provide them with research-based information. The goal of the recommendations is to address critical issues regarding education. ITW met in November and again in mid-December to discuss the recommendations, options or proposals. ITW will issue a Second Annual Report to the State this month after considering and/or modifying the recommendations of Learning Point Associates.
LPA designed a draft report in November 2006 called, “Creating a 21st Century Framework for Student Learning: Integrated Design Options for Learner Performance and Teacher Pay for Performance.” The draft indicates there is an “operational legacy” upon which important additional advances can be made due to previous incomplete attempts.
Previous pilot programs, in 1987 and 2001, attempted to implement positive changes that fell through due to lack of funding. The pilot program that began in 2001 occurred over three academic years. In the first year, there were pilot schools earning nine awards, ranging from $8,400 to $44,400. The second year there were 10 pilot schools, earning seven awards ranging from $9,600 to $112,900, and the third academic year had nine pilot schools earning two awards, $23,700 and $32,400.
All awards were primarily based on students’ Iowa Test of Basic Skills scores or curriculum-based measures. Efforts fell short due to a lack of state funding.
Increase pay, but based on whose performance?
A lack of funding isn’t the only problem for improving teacher pay, particularly when it’s based on performance.
“Completely outside of the financial issues is the issue of fair access to such incentives.” says Rose Judge. “Just exactly who is responsible for the success measured? Who will be excluded?”
Melissa Russell has major concerns with teacher salaries being based on student test scores.
“I completely disagree 100 percent from a parent’s perspective,” she said. “Not everyone tests well. Test scores do not represent a student’s ability or intelligence. I think basing pay solely on test scores would be a huge mistake.”
The Learning Point Associates report observed that many teachers were concerned about the measure of their performance being one standardized test taken by students. Based on this information, the draft recommends that a mixed-model approach be implemented so that student performance is not the exclusive indicator.
How do you measure performance? According to the LPA draft, “making Iowa’s students successful in the future will require different ways of teaching. ‘Proficiency’ in basic skills will not suffice,” the report says. To have a high impact on preparing students to be successful in their lives after high school, seven of 10 Iowa voters say teachers must teach critical thinking and problem-solving skills, and eight of 10 say students need to learn communication and information technology skills. (Selzer & Co).
Oswald, the WBMS principal, asks, “How are these skills measured on current assessments?” Iowa has begun an effort to define coherent curricula. According to LPA, it is a “good start” but the report goes on to say, “the descriptors provide no clear clues to the students about how much they should be able to do, nor to the teacher about what to teach or how to teach it, nor to the system about how to distinguish 11th grade accomplishment from 4th grade accomplishment.”
Middle school teacher Bonnie Murphy is concerned that there is only so much control a teacher can have over the learning and especially the test performance of students. Says Murphy, “Standardized test scores have been shown to be correlated with socio-economic status, a variable over which a classroom teacher has no control. It seems illogical and unfair for a person’s compensation to depend on such variables.”
Russell agrees. “Basing pay on test scores will eventually make a teacher lose their desire to be creative. To funnel teaching for a test result is ridiculous. There are students who get A’s and B’s on report cards that do not test well.” she says.
Oswald adds that she can’t “arbitrarily” say that she is against the pay-per-performance system, but she can’t completely support it either. “I am concerned that the powers that be will not take the time that it needs to be successful.” She is also concerned about the impact it will have on the school’s climate. “It may possibly increase the likelihood of cheating and cause animosity between teachers.”
Pedersen also does not believe in performance-based pay. “I feel teachers will close the doors to others and not share neat ideas with one another. “
Murphy shares that concern, “If test results are held supreme, then the limited time and energy for education will be more likely dominated by what is on the test. This can dictate curricular planning, robbing students of the richness and variety of a well-balanced curriculum.”
Some teachers question whether there could be devastating consequences for students who jeopardize the possible rewards of their teachers and school districts.
“If a student is not successful, will they be forced out? Not allowed to enroll? How will regional demographics play into this kind of funding? Will there be adjustments to socio-economic status? Under-funded rural programs or inner city districts?” asks Judge. “Public education is not like industry. Our mission is to provide the best possible education for all students and to do so within the confines of federal and state guidelines. These guidelines often limit or reduce or eliminate necessary programs for success.”
“Money would be better spent making teacher salaries competitive so that good teachers can afford to stay in teaching,” adds Judge.
Elementary teacher Stephanie Hnesh is hesitant to be supportive of performance-based pay. “I have been waiting to see more specifics. I like some aspects, like the acquisition of attributes that improve student achievement. I think things like that create a team atmosphere, as well as focus on the professional development support that we all know is valuable and needed in order to continue to evolve as professionals.”
“In terms of the ties to student achievement, it looks like they will have to continue to look at it carefully,” Hnesh said. “It sounds like most people who have studied that can’t really see a benefit. The proposal in 2001 is an example of how a lot of these ideas don’t make it very far because of funding. I will wait and see if it gets to the piloting stage.”
Implementation
Oswald worries that some issues may get overlooked when initiating the next pilot program. She said the state “has a habit of taking committee recommendations and then running full force” without recognizing that more detail is needed on exactly how to implement the draft recommendations.
Oswald discourages using student test scores as a means for determining eligibility for bonuses. “When you tie a dollar amount to scores you increase the likelihood of unethical behavior. This happens around the country.”
The whole-school reward system is the easiest proposal for Oswald to accept. This would encourage a school system to work cooperatively — incentives for annual bonuses would be a team effort.
“Other programs are inadvertently designed to pit teachers against one another for performance recognition; this strategy rewards the entire staff for working together for a common goal,” she said.
This kind of program may also allow teachers to share ideas for education beyond what is required for desired test scores.
Many would agree that Iowa is in need of a plan that will encourage young people to work in education and to stay in Iowa — a plan that will reward excellent teachers for their efforts and dedication to the youth of our communities. Pedersen agrees but also adds that, “Veteran teachers need to be rewarded for staying in the profession. At times it seems the younger teachers are worried about it, while the veterans are not.”
Governor Chet Culver defends our educators, saying, “We have a problem out there, and it’s not that they’re not performing,” he said. “The problem is we’re not committing the resources to pay them a salary that is comparable to at least other states in the Midwest.”
To construct a pay plan that will ‘value’ all educators and put it into action will take patience, dedication and funding. Nevertheless, it is important to Culver that we make changes.
“I just want to make the point that teachers are performing every day in 365 school districts,” Culver said, “and they’re not getting paid what they’re worth.”
More about teacher pay
To read the Learning Point Associates Final Draft Recommendation for ITW, go to www.tomorrowsworkforce.org.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
