If the show doesn't fit, must we change the foot? — Gloria Steinem
 |
|
Author: Allan Odden |
Few question the idea that the quality of teaching is the most critical factor in student achievement.
Unfortunately, the incentives for quality teachers to stay in the profession — or to choose it in the beginning — do not bear much correlation to that fact.
With school systems under extreme pressure to hire and retain quality teachers, disparities in pay are making it more and more difficult to compete with better-paying employers in other fields.
"Over time, the wage gap between teachers and their peers becomes a gulf that can sabotage schools' best efforts to recruit and retain the best teachers," says Economic Policy Institute researcher Sylvia Allegretto. Teachers are having to "choose between their students and their own families' well-being."
Allegretto and fellow EPI researchers Sean Corcoran and Lawrence Mishel describe what they think amounts to a penalty for teaching in their book, How Does Teacher Pay Compare?
Since 1993, teacher wages have fallen 11.5 percent relative to workers with similar education and skills.
"If we as a society want to provide a qualified teacher in every classroom, then we'll have to deal with the sizable erosion of teacher pay relative to their peers," says Mishel. "Maintaining or improving teacher pay cannot be done on the cheap."
Is it any wonder CTA's Educational Change Workgroup is talking about finding new funding streams, improving pay structures, offering incentives and refining assistance programs designed to attract teachers and keep them in the profession?
The workgroup is proposing that CTA develop and pilot various compensation models and working condition incentives for chapters to bargain, especially in districts facing the greatest challenges. The models it envisions would include incentives to attract and retain educators, as well as compensation for developing additional skills and knowledge, agreeing to work in challenging schools or taking on challenging assignments.
All of these compensation opportunities would be on top of a reasonable base pay that acknowledges the level of experience and education that educators bring to the table. None of it would happen without a significant infusion of money. An adequate funding stream would be necessary, both for the short-term pilot projects and long-term improvements. And any alternative compensation package must be negotiated between the local union and the district, and must include minimum employee rights components.
At the workgroup's suggestion, CTA is studying how well current alternative compensation models stack up against the single salary schedule in providing incentives and rewards for educators to pursue professional development, in encouraging a climate of innovation and exploration, and in supporting student learning and teacher professional practice.
Another area in which the workgroup is focusing attention is expanding and improving professional development and peer assistance. It wants to see the state budget augmented to fully fund the Beginning Teacher Support and Assistance program (BTSA) and the Peer Assistance and Review program (PAR). It would also like to see BTSA fully integrated with PAR and overseen by a joint teacher/administrator review panel.
The traditional single salary schedule has served educators well for many years, says Allan Odden, author of Paying Teachers for What They Know and Do . It's easy to administer, objective in its application and impervious to administrative whim. So why monkey with it?
The idea of basing a teacher's salary on years of experience combined with education credits and degrees was introduced in 1921 to correct the inequities of an era when women, minorities and even elementary school teachers were paid less than their counterparts. Most of what its originators sought to accomplish — like encouraging teachers to get college degrees — has been achieved.
Nowadays, it may no longer meet the needs of teachers because it does little to encourage or reward educators who wish to develop their professional knowledge and skills, nor does it support a climate of innovation and exploration, says Odden, who came to Burlingame for a conversation with workgroup members.
Odden advocates setting "explicit standards for teacher performance" and aligning them with state and district standards for what students should know and be able to do. Evaluating teachers on specific knowledge and skills, he maintains, would rule out workplace decisions based on administrative whim. Odden says any reward should be linked to improved teaching practices - not student test scores.
"Until expert teachers are paid like experts," he says, "education will continue to lose bright and able candidates to other professions."
CTA's workgroup also recognizes that the single salary schedule — combined with district transfer and hiring policies — may be exacerbating the unequal distribution of resources between student populations and schools.
The workgroup consulted with the Denver Classroom Teachers Association (DCTA) about its successful effort to win voter approval for a significant outlay of money for teacher compensation. The alternative pay plan, ProComp, was designed by the teachers in partnership with Denver Public Schools. Expected to cost $25 million a year, it significantly raises base pay and provides extra compensation for educators if they earn advanced certification, work in high-poverty schools or teach subjects that have a shortage of qualified instructors, such as math and science, or if their students meet academic targets.
The workgroup also looked at compensation plans in Ohio and Pennsylvania.
If California educators decide to go the alternative compensation route, the workgroup wants them to be able to opt out of alternative compensation opportunities if they so desire. Participants must also receive no less in salary and benefits than they are getting in the existing system. The group is adamant about ensuring that all alternatives are locally bargained, that there's permanent and sustainable funding, and that compensation is not tied directly to standardized test scores as it has been in Florida.
The workgroup envisions CTA joining the ranks of others who are exploring innovation and experimentation with teacher compensation programs, including the Gates, Broad, Hewlett and Irvine foundations.
Teacher surveys and focus group research show substantial interest among CTA members in alternative compensation systems as long as they are "rational, objective and fair, and are implemented in a manner that is widely recognized as inclusive, sensitive and reasonable."
"People want incentives — especially younger teachers," says workgroup member Kathy Harris, a member of the Piner-Olivet Educators Association (Sonoma County). "If they work hard and get kids to achieve, they want to be paid for that."
"Alternative compensation is the most controversial part of our recommendations," acknowledges Terri Jackson, chair of the workgroup. "All along, I assumed that this would be something we would just look at and not be something we'd make recommendations on. But we kept an open mind for discussion and exploration to take place."
