I can think of a million reasons to oppose merit pay

[proud2BlibKansan]

but number one has to be that administrators get to decide who gets a merit raise and who does not.

Don't get me wrong. My dad was a principal and his teachers always spoke highly of him. But in my 3 decades in this business, I can list on one hand the number of administrators I worked under who I felt were competent. And fewer who I thought could step in my classroom and do MY job.

The same administrators who hire all these supposedly "incompetent" teachers now get to decide how much to pay them? Sure.

The same administrators who can't figure out how to fire all these supposedly "incompetent" teachers (when it really isn't that hard)?

The same administrators who can't manage a budget well enough to give teachers money for classroom supplies?

The same administrators who freely admit the reason they became administrators was to make more money? Not to help teachers be better or even to help kids but to make more money. (Every principal I know except one, when asked why he/she became a principal, gives this as a reason.)

The same administrators who can't manage routing district wide transportation, making a school calendar, or communicating with employees via email (ours is mainly used to tell us which district employees have died recently and which high schools have a big game coming up)?

The same administrators who can't manage to write or update a curriculum? Even when the state lays out the process for them?

The same administrators who can't manage to hire enough teachers to staff a district or to provide an accurate list of teachers and where they were teaching (yes, true story)?

If those administrators get to decide how much of a raise I will be getting, then no thanks.

[napi21]

1. Merit pay is the way every other business handles their employee

wages, and the same amount or more incompetence exists in every line of work. Why do you feel teachers should be treated differently?

I'm not trying to pick a fight with you. I'm trying to understand your reasoning.

[skooooo]

3. Because teachers aren't working for profit..

...and there are only so many teachers. Read my other post, I think this illustrates why merit pay can be a really effed up way of treating workers.

[proud2BlibKansan]

4. Because our kids are too important

for their teachers to be paid in the same way as car salesmen.

Schools are not businesses.

[beyurslf]

10. Plenty of other business models don't do merit increases.

They do across the board increases that are the same for everyone.

[NashVegas]

39. There's An Idealist's Delusion For You

Perhaps your workplace is one of the 5% where a genuine merit-based system flourishes, but out here in the real world skill, accomplishments and talent play second fiddle to office politics.

[skooooo]

2. It also assumes..

...that only a certain percentage of employees will do excellent work. Let's say you get merit pay to reward only 10% of your workforce, where does that let's say the 40% who do a very, very good job?

[soothsayer]

5. They get the salaries they earn for doing a very very good job.

And if they want to get a bonus or raise, they can try harder to make it into the top 10% next year.

[skooooo]

7. Teachers get salaries??

Their pay sucks as it is. Your little business model is perfect for crashing K-12.

[RaleighNCDUer]

8. And how do you figure out who the 10% are?

Those who produce the highest test scores? Since when is the ability to pass a test any indicator of learning how to think?

Standardized testing might work for math and science, but how do you standardize testing for ethics? Political science? Gym? Civics?

Math and science and basic english make for good workers - ethics and the 'soft' sciences and the arts make for good citizens. The more we concentrate on standardized testing, the more we will have rampant cheating, and teaching to the test; and merit pay rewards most the teachers whose classes are susceptible to those abuses.

[proud2BlibKansan]

16. Two scenarios:

1. A kindergarten teacher has a student who will eventually be placed in a program serving severely emotionally disturbed children. It takes every ounce of energy she has to keep this child contained and to prevent him from injuring her other students. She is successful and this child eventually calms down and is less disruptive. However, the rest of the class does not advance as far in the curriculum as they should have because their classroom was disrupted daily for most of the year by an out of control classmate.

2. A fourth grade teacher's class gets the top scores in the state on the state accountability test. There are no emotionally disturbed disruptive students in this class and they spent their year focused on learning.

Which teacher gets the raise? You can only pay one of them. Which one?

[sandnsea]

6. I don't think that's the plan

I think the plan is to award teachers who have increased their education, are taking on additional tasks, teaching in difficult districts, etc. Regular teachers in regular classrooms won't necessarily have anything changed. That's the kind of negotiation your union will make. My son is in the grocery union and even he can increase his pay by adding responsibilities and learning new tasks. You'll still have a union so you'll still be protected against unfair firing or discrimination.

[RaleighNCDUer]

9. That only works if it is the union that determines the parameters for

those awards - if you have administrators and school boards and politicians determining what the parameters of merit pay are you will have nothing but higher pay for higher test scores - which is ultimately a huge failure.

[sandnsea]

12. You think the union will sit on their hands?

and say nothing? I don't think so. And I don't recall Obama ever proposing higher pay for higher test scores. Inceasing pay has always been tied to working in troubled districts, etc.

[proud2BlibKansan]

15. I have not seen that anywhere but I hope you are right.

It also isn't much of a change. I am currently paid for increasing my education and for taking on extra students or duties.

[sandnsea]

18. He's said it in every education speech

"My plan would provide resources to try these innovative programs in school districts all across America. Under my Career Ladder Initiative, these districts will be able to design programs that reward accomplished educators who serve as mentors to new teachers with the salary increase they deserve. They can reward those who teach in underserved areas or teachers who take on added responsibilities, like you do right here at MESA. And if teachers acquire additional knowledge and skills to serve students better — if they consistently excel in the classroom — that work can be valued and rewarded as well."

Here's one.
http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_9405199

[proud2BlibKansan]

19. That's Career Ladder; it is different from Merit Pay

[sandnsea]

20. No It Is Not

It's the exact same thing he has said over and over and over. This is what he is talking about. Anti-Obama people are the ones who concocted this whole "merit pay" scheme that has never existed. He has no intention of implementing any traditional kind of definition of merit pay where teachers are paid based on classroom tests. It's really just a bald-faced lie.

[proud2BlibKansan]

21. Obama favors merit pay

He also favors career ladder.

Merit pay is raises for only selective teachers for achieving certain standards determined by the school district.

Career ladder is being paid for working extra duties, like tutoring after school.

There is a huge difference. And yes, Obama has spoken many times about merit pay. He likes it.

[sandnsea]

23. Whatever

When you see that he isn't advocating any system to match teachers salaries to test scores, I will come back and say I told you so. He has specifically talked against the kind of merit pay you describe, despite the fact that Hillary's supporters couldn't get off their talking points to see the truth - and apparently still can't.

[HelenWheels]

25. administrators often ignore plans

and reward their toadies

[YvonneCa]

33. Dang. I shouln't have...

...retired. :7 I went back to school for an admin. credential, served as a master and mentor teacher for years, and teach in a district with the 13th lowest socio-economic level in the country. Darn. No wonder they pushed me into retirement. :7 And the union...they did NOTHING.

[LWolf]

42. We actually already have that in the system.

Those are the "columns" on the pay scale; we can move over every 15 units until we hit the end of the line. That "end" is different depending on state and district; perhaps he means to take off the caps?

And, of course, we get stipends for some "extra duty," which is taking on additional tasks. Perhaps he means to pay more than a token for those extra duties?

I don't know; I listened closely, and I heard what you are referring to. It was ambiguous enough that I couldn't tell what he was really talking about. Either extending and enriching something we already do, or something else?

I couldn't tell the difference. That, and the fact that merit pay, along with charter schools, vouchers, and high-stakes testing itself, are part of the agenda to privatize schools, leaves me troubled.

I'm MORE troubled since the selection of Arne Duncan, who is known by teachers in Chigago, some of whom I've been talking to for several years now, as, in the recent words of one: a "Privatizer, Union Buster, and Corporate Stooge."

My guard is up and I'm on alert, until I see something that convinces me otherwise.

I do hope you are correct.

[cosmik debris]

11. THANK YOU!!!!!

That was quite refreshing!

[proud2BlibKansan]

14. LOL! You are most welcome

:)

[AndyTiedye]

13. This Does Beg the Question of Why the Administrators are So Incompetent

[proud2BlibKansan]

17. I wish I knew

Most are better when they first become administrators. One first year principal I worked for came into every classroom regularly and taught a lesson. The kids loved her and felt like they got to know her better. And the teachers admired her.

But eventually most seem to get on a power kick and become unreasonable and stupid.

[keroro gunsou]

35. administrators first

educators second.

[LWolf]

43. I've had great admins, and less-than-great, to put it mildly.

Part of the problem is embedded within the system. Some people get their teaching license, teach a few years while they finish an administrative credential, and never look back.

Why? 1. Admins make more money.
2. Admins have more power.
3. Admins don't have to deal with actual students; they can leave that to teachers, and then blame them for problems. #3 is significant when you realize that the people who don't have to work with students are in charge of evaluating those that do. They don't DO the job; they just judge it.

Some people enter the profession never intending to spend any more than the minimum years in the classroom; usually about 5.

Others realize, after they are there, that they don't like the classroom, and weren't aware of all the unpaid, and unlauded, hours outside of the instructional day they have to put in. So they move up the ladder.

Others, and I've known a bunch in my 25+ years, are pulled and put on an administrative track because they ARE incompetent or problematic in the classroom.

I've even known principals that were pulled by the district and assigned jobs at the D.O. to get them further away from parents and students.

The wrong people are in charge.

That said, I've had some wonderful admins, true mentors, and true champions for both teachers and families, as well.

Without exception, these were people who had lengthy teaching careers FIRST. Who put a couple of decades of their time, attention, and energy into the classroom, and who moved on because they wanted to carry that expertise into administration to support teachers and students.

[LWolf]

22. I can join you with plenty of substantial reasons.

Unfortunately, I don't think it's going away as an issue any time soon. :(

[Scooter24]

24. I believe merit pay would be welcomed by the teachers in my community

especially seeing as how 65% of our property taxes get taken away every year to pay for the many grossly under-performing schools in this state. We now spend $1500 less than the state average per student and still achieve incredible results thanks to our hardworking parents and teachers. I and many in this community would love to see the district start increasing their salaries based on results. Hopefully the state will take those figures into consideration before pulling our tax money out of the district.

We have a 8% special education population as well. Here are our 2008 TAKS results-

http://www.greatschools.net/cgi-bin/tx/district_profile/491#students

Scale: % meeting or exceeding standards

Grade 3
Reading- 100%
Math- 100%

Grade 4
Reading- 100%
Writing- 100%
Math- 99%

Grade 5
Reading- 100%
Science- 97%
Math- 100%

Grade 6
Reading- 100%
Math- 100%

Grade 7
Reading- 98%
Writing- 99%
Math- 99%

Grade 8
Reading- 100%
Social Studies- 99%
Science- 97%
Math- 100%

Grade 9
Reading- 99%
Math- 97%

Grade 10
Social Studies- 100%
Science- 97%
English Language Arts- 97%
Math- 99%

Grade 11
Social Studies- 100%
Science- 100%
English Language Arts- 100%
Math- 99%

In 2007-2008 this district was acknowledged by the Texas Education Agency for the following indicator(s):

* Commended Performance: Reading/English Language Arts
* Commended Performance: Mathematics
* Commended Performance: Writing
* Commended Performance: Science
* Commended Performance: Social Studies
* Texas Success Initiative - Higher Education Readiness Component: Math
* Texas Success Initiative - Higher Education Readiness Component: English Language Arts
* Advanced Course/Dual Enrollment Completion
* Advanced Placement/International Baccalaureate Results
* Attendance Rate
* Recommended High School Program
* SAT/ACT Results

HPHS was selected as a Blue Ribbon School in 2007 by the US Department of Education.

In 2007-2008 this district was rated "Exemplary" by the Texas Education Agency. In 2006-2007, this district was rated "Exemplary". In 2005-2006, this district was rated "Exemplary".


I'm fully aware that the merit model might now work for all, but it sure would work in our community.

[Nevernose]

26. 94% white, 97% attendance rate, 0% free/reduced lunch,

But what do you do in my community? The school I teach at is 50% ELL (yet only ~10% of students are born out of country). Somewhere less than 94% minority (definitions differ). More than 80% free and reduced lunch. Other schools in my district, however, look a lot like yours.

Four years ago I had a kid we'll call JT. JT only came to school 2nd and 3rd periods -- his remedial English classes. ELL, rough neighborhood, bad family, drug habit. At the big parent-teacher conference to determine the last step before expulsion, JT was asked, "When I look at your attendance records, you only seem to come to 2nd and 3rd periods. Why is that?"

JT said, "Because he's nice to me. He doesn't judge me and he acts like he's happy I'm there even when I know he's pissed that I'm not there all the time." They didn't expel him, largely because of my persuasion.

JT's on track to graduate this year -- with a scholarship to an actual accredited university. So where does my merit pay come in? I won't ever see a cent for kids like JT. And honestly? I'm getting by. I even have health insurance AND retirement. I'd rather never, ever see a dime of merit pay if it means one kid like JT gets passed over due to NCLB and merit pat bullshit.

[proud2BlibKansan]

27. What makes you think merit pay would raise those test scores?

It won't.

Reduced class size, community centered schools and involved parents all have a much larger impact on achievement and test scores than teacher salaries.

[noamnety]

29. That's a great example of why merit pay is so stupid.

A 6th grade teacher there is apparently inheriting students who are already 100% meeting or exceeding standards. So they take 6th graders that are reading on grade level at the start of the year, and are still reading on grade level at the end of the year.

Is that teacher really more deserving of merit pay than a 6th grade teacher in another district who gets kids reading at a 3rd grade level in September, who gets them reading on average at a 5th grade level by June? That teacher has raised their level by two full grades ... but by NCLB is less successful than a teacher in your school who raises the reading level by only 1 grade.

It's no great challenge to have successful kids if the incoming ones are already successfully functioning at their grade level ... why is anyone arguing that those teachers deserve the most pay?

[Hangingon]

30. The first example is not merit pay.

If you take kids on 6th grade level and raise them to 7th grade level, you are doing your job and deserve regular pay. The second example might be merit pay. You get kids below level and bring them to standard or above.

I am not a big advocate of merit pay. The measurements used to determine bonuses are too often flawed. Who makes the determinations? If objective standards are chosen and followed, it can be a good incentive. On the other hand, why should a successful teacher share bonus winning techniques?

[noamnety]

31. One of the very real concerns

is what happens when you get kids who are 4 years behind the standard, and you raise them to 2 years behind the standard.

The systems views those teachers as failures, because we measure students against a state or national benchmark and against groups of students from previous years, rather than measuring the progression of the students themselves.

[YvonneCa]

34. That teacher in the other district would be ...

...me. :7

[LWolf]

32. As a teacher who actually received

a form of "merit pay," a check for making API in CA shortly before NCLB swept the nation, I have to disagree.

We knew that our students performed better than the rest of our district because we had many freedoms to do things that the rest of our peers didn't; we were a "pilot" program that our district never had any intention of spreading.

When those other schools DIDN'T make API and AYP for a few years, and the sanctions and mandates descended, it wasn't on the low performing schools. We all had to standardize our programs to fit the mandates given the low performing schools, despite the fact that our school was HIGH performing without them.

We didn't want "merit" pay. We wanted to continue the professional collaboration, the spirit of teamwork, that had gotten our school as far as we had, and we wanted to extend the privileges we'd been granted to work outside the standardized box in order to achieve to the rest of our colleagues in the district.

Collaboration. NOT competition.

Not that it mattered what we wanted; we were forced to standardize. I moved out of state.

[Sabriel]

28. My main objection to merit pay is its basic premise

It'll somehow make teachers work harder and better.

WTF? Just about every teacher I know is already doing that.

And here's another one for the list: most administrators I've worked for have rewarded their friends/supporters: better schedules, better classes, fewer preps...the list goes on. I wouldn't want them determining who gets more pay (for whatever BS reason).

[AwakeAtLast]

36. When they start paying per number of students, I'll be happy

I see 885 students per week. :D

[proud2BlibKansan]

37. Wow

I would have to oppose this though since my caseload is less than 10% of yours. :)

[davefromqueens]

38. Outstanding Thread

I taught for 10 years in public schools. You understand.

Who decides merit? This would be a recipe for graft, favoritism, isolationism, and of course many times it's the administrators who are the problem and it's the good teachers they have a problem with.

[proud2BlibKansan]

40. Thanks dave

It is so frustrating when people who have never taught decide that merit pay is a great idea.

[davefromqueens]

41. thanks as well

You fully understand.

I have a unique teaching background in that not only have I truly seen it all, I happened to work multiple years in one of the 5 best districts in New York State and perhaps the worst one.
Although the best are usually at the best and the worst at the worst, there were exceptions.

Key to teaching is everyone working together. Occasionally I had the best idea (and very often the worst one) but being able to share it makes everyone better just as I learned so much from others willing to go out of their way to make me better. So called "merit pay" would kill most of that dead in its tracks.

More, who decides "merit?" I can vouch for which teachers are superlative, just good, okay or lousy in any school I've ever worked but the bottom line is this is my opinion. Someone else may disagree.

"Merit pay" is also difficult to assess. If I take kids 2 levels below grade level and in one year get them 1 year below the next grade level, I've done a great job. However, if I have top track kids in the top 1% and they all remain in the top 1% have I really done as good a job? (And I have had both and they are the two toughest groups to teach.)