Comments on: NEA on Merit Pay, Without the Sugar Coating

By: Mike

Mike — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 19:40:06 +0000

Perhaps we can learn from business and model the teacher pay for performance systems used in the private sector – like at AIG and Goldman Sachs? Where are all these alleged successful pay for performance systems that work so well in the private sector? And why do we constantly want to inflict the private business sector policies used in the US on our education system? It can’t be as a result of the success of US companies.

By: Jane S

Jane S — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 18:49:24 +0000

The problem with all merit pay systems in public schools is that the public schools are not a business. In a business, hign performers are paid more out of the increased income they create. In school systems, the higher pay for the so-called high performers has to be accomplished by paying less to those who are not so designated. When that is done, it becomes very hard to staff ALL teaching positions with highly-qualified educators.
Historically, all merit pay systems have come a cropper on the issue of cost, and are then terminated, not by the union, but by the public officials who have run out of money to fund the system. This is what happened in the late 1980′s, when Republican Tom Davis caused the termination of Fairfax County, Virginia’s “career ladder” program, over the objection of the Fairfax Education Association and Mary Hatwood Futrell, the then president of the National Education Association.
There is now a merit pay system in place throughout much of the country. It is certification by the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. One has to ask why Barack Obama would want to grant higher pay to teachers who have not achieved this certification.
National Board certification carries with it the advantage of avoiding the corruption, favortism and nepotism to which too many decisions about who is a good teacher have fallen prey in the past.

By: Jim

Jim — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 19:39:48 +0000

Give administrators a ‘salary cap’ and make it their job to hire the best people they can with it. Let them pay what they need to, to whom they need to, to get the results they need. Judge them by the results–reward them if more students show improvement, fire them if they don’t.

What is so hard about that?

By: Mike Antonucci

Mike Antonucci — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 21:38:07 +0000

David,

You’re correct in that performance pay systems have been negotiated by NEA affiliates in a few places. What you’ve left out is those negotiations occurred without the approval or participation of NEA, and with much opposition within the union.

What you have described as “NEA rhetoric” is in fact the official policy of the union, voted on and approved by delegates from all state affiliates year after year. Until that changes, the pay systems you describe will continue to be isolated and rare.

By: David Cohen

David Cohen — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 20:05:34 +0000

While these quotes sound pretty damning, it should be noted that there are performance pay systems in place in various places around the country. They have varying names and varying approaches. The ones that are working best I think (MN and Denver) are in places where they were negotiated with unions in partnership with administrators. So while the NEA rhetoric is nice blog fodder, the truth is more nuanced. When local unions rely on collective bargaining principles and can negotiate in good faith with districts, then there is room for movement on performance pay.

I hope more teachers will recognize this trend as an opportunity to bring about reform. We shouldn’t dig in our heels to oppose it, but rather insist that it be done properly. I am in total agreement with NEA that student test scores on most standardized tests should not be used for performance pay. (I’ve written about that idea in Teacher Magazine: http://snipurl.com/dr17r

There’s a good report researched and written by teachers in the Teacher Leaders Network, part of the Center For Teaching Quality, that further describes principles behind which more teachers would stand in the design and implementation of a high quality performance pay system:
http://www.teachingquality.org/pdfs/TSreport.pdf

By: Darren

Darren — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 01:36:45 +0000

Where are these resolutions found online? I cannot find them at NEA’s web site.

By: BenjaminL

BenjaminL — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 21:02:54 +0000

‘That last provision is important. It doesn’t say “student test scores,” it says “student performance.” It doesn’t say “education employee evaluation by a principal or other administrator.” It says “education employee evaluation.”’

How do these people get away with it? Aren’t they ashamed of themselves?