Dear Ms. Thomas-Manning, and members of the Reynoldsburg School Board:
I am taking time to write to you today concerning the second study that the district has chosen to release (tweeted July 24th) regarding teacher pay (http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/education/report/2014/07/23/94168/mid-and-late-career-teachers-struggle-with-paltry-incomes/ ). Although the argument seems to be that teachers make far too little money mid-way through their careers (and I won’t argue that point), the comparisons made don’t hold water.
I am taking time to write to you today concerning the second study that the district has chosen to release (tweeted July 24th) regarding teacher pay (http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/education/report/2014/07/23/94168/mid-and-late-career-teachers-struggle-with-paltry-incomes/ ). Although the argument seems to be that teachers make far too little money mid-way through their careers (and I won’t argue that point), the comparisons made don’t hold water.
The comparisons listed early in the article compare teacher salaries to those of sheet-metal workers, flight attendants and construction workers. Notably, these career choices are found most often in companies that produce a product and thereby a profit for the company, whereas schools rely on a funding formula that relies heavily on taxpayers. Later, a comparison of increasing salaries is drawn between teachers and salespeople. Again, people who sell a product will end up with a profit… there is no profit margin in education.
I am interested in the following example: “the District of Columbia’s IMPACTplus teacher-evaluation system provides monetary rewards based on performance and enables teachers in low-income schools to be eligible for the largest bonuses. Shira Fishman, a former TNTP Teaching Fellow, was able to earn a six-figure salary from teaching in a high-need school and receiving a “highly effective” rating two years in a row. And while there are a variety of factors that go into the evaluation of teachers in the District…” I did further research on the IMPACT plus model (http://dcps.dc.gov/DCPS/impactplus ) and found the following, “As noted above, DCPS and the WTU collaboratively developed the system. As part of this process, we examined compensation models from around the country.” In a nutshell, this is what has been missing in Reynoldsburg, and what has caused the upheaval that you are now witnessing: a lack of collaboration with the teachers- and I don’t mean in the form of negotiating a contract under time constraints. True study and research takes time, and if some form of merit pay is to be instituted here in our schools, it should be well done and multifaceted, not quickly put together under contract pressures, and certainly not based solely on the OTES.
By navigating this same website, I was able to glean that there are layers to this IMPACT plus system, including support, training, and professional development. In fact, two of the cases cited include compensation for professional development: “Portland takes a slightly different approach than Washington, D.C., with its Professional Learning Based Salary Schedule, or PLBSS, which provides teachers with the opportunity to earn higher salaries by taking classes. The goal of Portland’s salary system is to reward teachers who continuously update their skills.” And “In Baltimore, teachers are part of a career pathway incentive-based pay system whereby they accumulate “achievement units” for demonstrating professional effectiveness. Teachers gain these units through professional development, strong evaluations, and gains in learning outcomes, among other measures.” These critical components are lacking in the current proposal, and again, not facets that can be created or implemented overnight.
Once again, I urge you to think carefully about the outcomes you desire. Strong schools and well-compensated teachers will certainly draw people to the district, but the one-dimensional evaluation system currently proposed doesn’t resemble either of the research pieces the district has put out as justification for the proposal. Step back, settle a fair contract with the teachers using current compensation methods. Then, set a timeline for a collaborative effort with teachers, administration, Board members, parents and community members to research and discuss the myriad of options related to ‘merit pay’. Doing so would concretely show the respect you have, time and again, said that you have for our teachers.
Respectfully,
Beth Thompson
I am interested in the following example: “the District of Columbia’s IMPACTplus teacher-evaluation system provides monetary rewards based on performance and enables teachers in low-income schools to be eligible for the largest bonuses. Shira Fishman, a former TNTP Teaching Fellow, was able to earn a six-figure salary from teaching in a high-need school and receiving a “highly effective” rating two years in a row. And while there are a variety of factors that go into the evaluation of teachers in the District…” I did further research on the IMPACT plus model (http://dcps.dc.gov/DCPS/impactplus ) and found the following, “As noted above, DCPS and the WTU collaboratively developed the system. As part of this process, we examined compensation models from around the country.” In a nutshell, this is what has been missing in Reynoldsburg, and what has caused the upheaval that you are now witnessing: a lack of collaboration with the teachers- and I don’t mean in the form of negotiating a contract under time constraints. True study and research takes time, and if some form of merit pay is to be instituted here in our schools, it should be well done and multifaceted, not quickly put together under contract pressures, and certainly not based solely on the OTES.
By navigating this same website, I was able to glean that there are layers to this IMPACT plus system, including support, training, and professional development. In fact, two of the cases cited include compensation for professional development: “Portland takes a slightly different approach than Washington, D.C., with its Professional Learning Based Salary Schedule, or PLBSS, which provides teachers with the opportunity to earn higher salaries by taking classes. The goal of Portland’s salary system is to reward teachers who continuously update their skills.” And “In Baltimore, teachers are part of a career pathway incentive-based pay system whereby they accumulate “achievement units” for demonstrating professional effectiveness. Teachers gain these units through professional development, strong evaluations, and gains in learning outcomes, among other measures.” These critical components are lacking in the current proposal, and again, not facets that can be created or implemented overnight.
Once again, I urge you to think carefully about the outcomes you desire. Strong schools and well-compensated teachers will certainly draw people to the district, but the one-dimensional evaluation system currently proposed doesn’t resemble either of the research pieces the district has put out as justification for the proposal. Step back, settle a fair contract with the teachers using current compensation methods. Then, set a timeline for a collaborative effort with teachers, administration, Board members, parents and community members to research and discuss the myriad of options related to ‘merit pay’. Doing so would concretely show the respect you have, time and again, said that you have for our teachers.
Respectfully,
Beth Thompson