Merit Pay for Teachers

[KiwiJo09]

This law just passed. Basically, teacher salaries are based on their students' test scores. My mom is a teacher and could hardly manage before. My parents are divorced and my mom doesn't make that much money to begin with.

They have given her an option: she can keep the amount she makes now but there's no chance of a raise...ever. Or she can subscribe to merit pay where she might lose money, but she might gain money as well, but would only get one year contracts (no job security).

What would you do and why? Also, what do you think about the government taking pay away from people who educate our youth instead of sports entertainers (or other people who could afford to take the hit)?

[cooliemae]

Could you post a link to the law that you're referencing?

[Coronet]

I don't think sports entertainers are paid by the government.... but that's not the point.

I think she should take the merit pay. I think it's worth it to try to increase your pay rather than be stuck at a certain income forever.

[jpg7n16]

Originally Posted by KiwiJo09

This law just passed. Basically, teacher salaries are based on their students' test scores. My mom is a teacher and could hardly manage before. My parents are divorced and my mom doesn't make that much money to begin with.

They have given her an option: she can keep the amount she makes now but there's no chance of a raise...ever. Or she can subscribe to merit pay where she might lose money, but she might gain money as well, but would only get one year contracts (no job security).

What would you do and why?

That is a very shortsighted law.

It all depends on which classes I was teaching: if I was working with the gifted and AP classes primarily, I would take the incentive. If I was working with the trouble kids, I would take the security.

Some teachers prefer to work with the students no one else wants to work with - but improvement doesn't always show up in standardized tests. The role of teachers to society isn't solely standardized tests.

I don't like the law.

Also, what do you think about the government taking pay away from people who educate our youth instead of sports entertainers (or other people who could afford to take the hit)?

Although I understand your sentiment, this is very easy to explain: professional athletes salaries are not part of the federal/state budgets. The gov doesn't pay athletes, therefore the government has no control over what they make.

The government pays teachers, so it has the authority to raise/lower salaries as it sees fit.

Maybe if the government would cut pork barrel spending, and reduce its debt (and therefore free up capital to use for education), maybe it would have more cash available to keep quality teachers around.

[Coronet]

Originally Posted by jpg7n16

That is a very shortsighted law.
Maybe if the government would cut pork barrel spending, and reduce its debt (and therefore free up capital to use for education), maybe it would have more cash available to keep quality teachers around.

Agreed. I 100% agree teachers are underpaid, but honestly on the flipside I think it's not something that comes as a surprise when people become teachers. People know how much (or little) they would be making becoming a teacher... it's not a massive surprise on the first day of work that you won't be paid much and the opportunity for salary increase is minimal compared to other professions.

I mean no offense, just an observation!

[jpg7n16]

Originally Posted by Coronet

Agreed. I 100% agree teachers are underpaid, but honestly on the flipside I think it's not something that comes as a surprise when people become teachers. People know how much (or little) they would be making becoming a teacher... it's not a massive surprise on the first day of work that you won't be paid much and the opportunity for salary increase is minimal compared to other professions.

I mean no offense, just an observation!

Why would I be offended by that? I agree with you.

But I know the world has people who would be very good teachers who stay away from becoming one because of the low pay. Then there are the very good teachers who become one in spite of the low pay (like you mention).

And there are certain to be teachers out there that want to stay teaching, but "just can't do this low pay stuff anymore - it's not worth it." Even though they knew it would be low pay going in, they're free to change their minds and go make more doing almost anything else

[littleroc02us]

Teaching runs in my family and I have worked in the education field as an IT tech for teachers and staff, I am guess I'm for the merit pay idea in some ways, but in others no. I use to help run the state requirement tests in Minnesota here and I know what it's like for teachers who teach in districts where the population and area of town has a lot to do with test scores. Believe me, I worked in 3 different school districts and each one was different, so I'm not sure how they would be able to tell the difference. But I also understand how they would reward the good teachers and penalize those teachers who are sliding by because the system rewards time and not quality of the classroom.

Personally, I think the problem is the tenure label which rewards the good and the bad teacher. If they really wanted to tackle budget I have a great idea for meeting that goal. When I worked at Hopkins Highschool they were always complaining about the state budget and the school not getting enough money, but the real problem is how it's managed. Our supervisor required us to burn our entire budget regardless if we needed to for fear of it being reduced. So, there was tons of waste. That is where the big problem exists.

As for teachers being underpaid, I don't agree. My Dad made decent money as a Science teacher, but also invested very wisely. He also ran a hobby farm, coached Football and worked summer teaching. He retired at age 58 and is financially well off, he has one house in Arizona and another in Minnesota. They vacation often and are living well in retirement. I don't by this I don't get paid enough as a teacher stuff.

[KiwiJo09]

Merit Pay for Florida Teachers

[Joan.of.the.Arch]

Are you saying some might choose to be locked in to the exact same pay forever? Would they at least get cost of living increases?

I live in a school district where kids get further behind the national averages, the longer they stay in school. Exceptionally good teachers could make a bigger difference here, if their hands were not tied by forcing them to use ho-hum curricula, spending most of the class time on "discipline," and having to concentrate on the elements of the upcoming achievement test to which their pay and employability is tied.

My schools are not paying what it takes to attract enough great teachers, yet we need good and dedicated teachers all the more because of the problems the kids arrive with (family unsupportive of real education; poor nutrition; poor sleep; tortured family life; etc).

In our legislature there is currently a bill to keep 67% of teachers salaries below $40K. Teachers already put 14.5% of pay into their pension system, reducing taxable (and spendable!) income to $34,200 for 2/3 of our teachers if this bill should go through. Sorry, but that is not enough. Teachers will be jumping ship as soon as they can get a job selling shoes at the mall, where at least they have security guards to call upon when some messed up child races at them with fists raised, abusively threatening.

[Frugal]

Merit pay is basically the way it has always been in every other industry...we are paid based upon performance. If I don't do well, I don't get a raise.

[jpg7n16]

Originally Posted by Frugal

Merit pay is basically the way it has always been in every other industry...we are paid based upon performance. If I don't do well, I don't get a raise.

So what if you're a teacher in an inner city school - and you inspire your students who used to make 50's in their classes to improve and get barely passing grades - but who still score decently low on standardized tests. By no means are they high performers, but they're improving.

Since even though your students showed improvement - your average students' scores are still low, so you don't get the incentive.

Would that be fair?


They are performance based after all, and your students still perform below average.



You can see why I think the law is flawed.

[khosta]

Wow - I think this horrible... It's like gambling with your salary. It could be a lose/lose situation or win/win I guess. If her basic salary isn't even that great to begin with, and she can't ever get a raise then what's the point of keeping it? But if she does this merit thing she could win or lose.... She might make good money but it depends on how well she teaches and how well the students grasp the concepts they are learning.... I don't like this.

[MonkeyMama]

I was reflecting on this because I have a child in 2nd grade. His teacher is AWESOME, the kids are mostly blank slates, and their test scores are through the roof. Not a lot of inherent advantage but that it is a charter school with very involved parents. (Plenty of low income children though). Anyway, though I have never been a fan of standardized testing, it has been interesting to see such a creative and enthusiastic teacher blow the standardized test scores out of the water. This is not a school that "teaches to the tests." Obviously, the tests are important, but the test scores seem to be a byproduct of an ambitious and well-rounded curriculum. (Foreign language, art, science, from Kindergarten - none of these required for test scores and funding).

All that said, I am talking 1st grade and 2nd grade. IT seems to me the playing field will vary significantly for each grade up we are talking. What if you are a terrific and innovative 5th grade teacher, but all the kids coming into your class are lacking the skills they should have learned in the lower grades? How are you going to get the high test scores? Sounds impossible. I think this is a huge problem with education at current. Just letting everyone slip through the system. You can't place that responsibility on the teachers if the school does nothing to rectify the problem. IF they have to pass everyone regardless of ability. Passing on the problems to compound in the future grades.

A woman just told me yesterday that 5000 pennies was $5,000. I have conversations with adults like this every day. A great teacher can't make up for these gaping holes in basic education.

[zetta]

I think there should be a review process for the teachers, where peer input, parent surveys, principal evaluation, absolute test scores, and improvement in test scores for individual children during that year are all taken into account. The principal should have the authority to hire and fire based on performance. There should be incentive pay to draw teachers to schools in difficult neighborhoods. The current system of tenure and pay based solely on senority means that burnout old teachers of poor quality will be retained while teachers who are more effective but less experienced will be laid off.

[littleroc02us]

What if they based the merit pay on the improvement of the scores from the previous to measure the change? Wouldn't that work?

[NJDebbie]

I'm a public school teacher in the state of New Jersey. If merit pay, as our governor C. Christie proposed to enact, quite honestly I will have to leave my profession for good. I do not teach English, Science or Math, which means that my pay will become stagnant. Merit pay will only benefit teachers in affluent communities. Education is not as black and white as it seems; there are many factors to consider.

[jpg7n16]

Originally Posted by littleroc02us

What if they based the merit pay on the improvement of the scores from the previous to measure the change? Wouldn't that work?

Then you'd deal with the flip side of the argument, that no one would want to work with the gifted students, and would only help the weakest. The lowest wouldn't be as low as they could have been, but highest wouldn't be as high as they could be.

If for example, you had a student score a perfect score on the standardized state test (like I did for TAAS - Texas), there is literally no room for improvement. What good is it for a teacher to raise an 88 student to a 94 (an increase of 6 points = 6.8% improvement), when the struggling kids go from a 50 to a 65 (15 points = 30% improvement).

Obviously the 2nd teacher got more improvement, right? But they're still failing, so is that good enough? Did the student now making an A from a B not improve also?

If the money's where the improvement is, then who'd want to teach the brilliant kids? All those AP teachers would have to settle for no pay raises.


So I don't like basing salary solely on final scores, nor do I like it on score improvement. There needs to be some balance. And IMO - the balance should be found on an individual basis - as determined by a school administrator, not solely on a metric from a standardized exam. Yes that could/should be a contributing factor, but not the entire criteria.

[snshijuptr]

If you are angry about the current state of education, quite complaining on a forum and email your representatives. Some things you should know:

- The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), recently known as No Child Left Behind, is coming up for reauthorization this year!
- President Obama has set out his goals for the reauthorization here:
http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/...int/index.html
- Keep an eye out for Education news or speeches by Secretary of Education Arne Duncan.
- Write your President, Federal representative, or State representative
Contact the White House | The White House
https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml

The next few months will be critical for education. Last June, I sat at a Department of Education conference while Arne Duncan promised that the ESEA would be reformed and reauthorized within a year. He has 3 months

(And for those of you saying to yourselves "Don't states regulate education" quit fooling yourselves. Policy and politics are ruled by money, and the federal government holds the biggest purse strings.)

[bennyhoff]

I don't know about others, but if everything else was equal, this type of rule would keep me away from teaching. Some kids I had don't feel like trying on a test, and now you want to dock my pay? At least at other jobs the boss (usually) knows who the good and bad workers are. I mean, I understand you want to reward better teachers, but test scores aren't the be all and end all of teaching, is it? There has to be a better way.

[littleroc02us]

Originally Posted by jpg7n16

So I don't like basing salary solely on final scores, nor do I like it on score improvement. There needs to be some balance. And IMO - the balance should be found on an individual basis - as determined by a school administrator, not solely on a metric from a standardized exam. Yes that could/should be a contributing factor, but not the entire criteria.

Some type of compromise should be in order using a little bit of merit and something else???