Time Magazine pubished a piece yesterday entitled, "How to Make Great Teachers," raising the issue -- annual, it seems -- of merit pay vs. the present system of college credit/years in service for pay.
I think I've commented on merit pay before, and think it's a good idea. Teacher friends decry merit pay, suggesting that it would be a biased system. However, having worked for magazines, newspapers, and Internet companies that all gave raises based on merit, I concede bias can be an issue, but should not be the reason to avoid merit pay.
As a writer and as a web producer (the person who manages the bits and pieces of the site), I had goals that my manager and I reviewed and agreed upon at the beginning of the year (or work cycle). I do that now, as a classroom teacher, with my AP; I provide three goals based on district, school site, and classroom standards and suggest how I will meet those goals.
The merit systems described once again, this time by writer Claudia Wallis, relies on test results. Wallis dutifully trots out the test-based review, suggesting that "in an era when states are testing all
students annually, there's a
new, less subjective window onto how well a teacher does her job."
I don't agree. This era's so-called objective tests are arguably subjective: who writes the tests?; questions favor white, male students; have you read the prompts from the CAHSEE written exam?; material (the history test for 10th graders in California routinely
includes materials that are NOT part of state standards for history); but most importantly, a one-day, all or nothing approach provides a sliver -- and an unclear sliver -- of student performance.
I do not ignore test results altogether. In fact, I review STAR scores to assess teaching needs for my classroom. However, a test should be only one measure of my overall success for that year. Classroom management, invovative lessons, literacy strategies, technology instruction are other areas for consideration.
It seems I am not alone in feeling this as Wallis notes, "Teachers rebelled against the notion that a year's worth of instruction
could be judged by how students did on a single test on a single day."
Merit pay, however, could be the "next big thing" in keeping teachers in the classroom. "In Denver, for example, Professional Compensation, or ProComp, is
the product of a seven-year collaboration among the teachers' union,
the district and city hall. Rolled out last school year, ProComp
includes nine ways for teachers to raise their earnings, some through
bonuses and some through bumps in salary. New hires are automatically
enrolled, while veterans have the option of sticking with the old
salary schedule. But in just one year, half of Denver's 4,555 teachers
have signed on." Huh, I wonder what the wonder package is. (Note: I will look it up.)
Recent Comments