There’s a new call to overhaul the way public school teachers get paid, and it’s coming from an unusual source: Teachers.

A teacher’s paycheck is usually determined by how many years she has worked and whether or not she has earned a master’s degree. Her work in the classroom — her performance — doesn’t count for much.

Now 18 master teachers from across the country say that must change. The group, convened by the North Carolina-based Center for Teaching Quality, spent a year studying this issue.

A “carefully crafted performance-pay system has huge potential to transform the teaching profession in ways that can help all students learn more,” says the teachers’ report, which is available at Teacherleaders.org.

A growing body of research and experience tells us what these accomplished teachers know instinctively: Nothing affects student achievement more than teacher quality.

“What we have here is a chance to recast and reshape our profession,” said Anthony Cody, an Oakland, Calif., math and science teacher who was part of the group.

The 18 expert educators gathered in Chicago recently to publicly share their findings.

Here’s what they recommend:

* Create at least three tiers in a base-pay system: novice, professional and expert, based on experience, credentials and performance.

* Supplement the base-pay system with performance rewards available to all teachers, particularly those who take on leadership roles and who show sustained student gains over time.

* Pay more for additional degrees and professional development only if the teacher boosts student achievement. Tossing extra credentials after one’s name does not necessarily make for a better teacher.

* Encourage collaboration among teachers about best teaching practices.

* Offer incentives to lure highly qualified teachers into high-need, low-performing schools — but only if those teachers show results in classrooms.

The traditional pay system for teachers came about more than 50 years ago as a way to address gender and race inequities among teachers. That was a different time, in a different world.

Performance pay isn’t a new idea, but it has become a hot topic in recent years as schools have been expected to meet more specific student achievement goals. Florida and Texas, Minneapolis and Denver, Montgomery County, Md., and a smattering of other school districts around the country have adopted versions of performance pay. Last fall, Chicago was awarded a $27.3 million federal grant to create a program in 40 schools that would reward teacher performance.

The Illinois Education Association, the state’s largest teacher union, officially opposes the idea of performance pay. But the union created a working group last summer to discuss how the idea might work to boost student outcomes and support teachers.

“If [teachers] don’t take responsibility, others will and it won’t be done as well,” said IEA Executive Director Jo Anderson, one of the speakers at the Center for Teaching Quality conference. “The single-salary schedule has no tie to accountability. That’s a flaw and a fault we must acknowledge and figure out how to do better.”

The findings of the 18 top-notch teachers who issued the “TeacherSolutions for Teacher Compensation” report underscore that we have a teacher compensation system divorced from student achievement. Illinois spends $20 billion a year on education. We must find smarter, more accountable ways to spend that money. And we need to focus school efforts, including compensation systems, with a single goal in mind: Raising student achievement.

Copyright © 2007, Chicago Tribune

I will continue to post ideas and thoughts here since this was never really a campaign site to begin with. Let’s all work together with the very best ideas we can.

In my very brief look the building at Central has aged more gracefully than has Centennial. It looks brighter and more spacious. Part of this is the high ceilings and more open architecture versus the dingy, cramped look at Centennial. I was surprised at this given the conversations with Central students and parents who envy their crosstown rival.

I was also surprised that the class offerings seemed much broader at Central. They have an auto/ small engines shop and a nice woodworking space neither of which Centennial has. The conversation was different and so I missed out on whether Centennial has a newspaper or student run yearbook. Just being led around by the principal (my kids are elementary age so no real occasion to know the high schools organically) I walked through Central for 90 minutes and Centennial for 30 so that may account for a more favorable view of Central’s facilities. Of course, it could also be that my expectations had been so low given the community conversation I hear.

I wonder if public meetings are another relic of a bygone era. Look at the wider society. Sports are very popular and they have been changed immeasurably by call-in radio. The internet is in the process of changing how we do politics. In general, technology is changing the nature of communication. It is great that the BOE meetings are on Cable access TV, what about putting archive copies of them on DVD at the library for those without cable? Why not see if we can get a scheduled spot on WILL and WDWS radio call in shows each month. Maybe we could rotate a pair of board members each week to host a public school forum on WEFT radio. Let’s ask the News-Gazette for a free or subsidized quarter-page display ad each day to fill up as we wish. It can say paid advertisement to distinguish it from news coverage but there is no way Unit 4 can pay their going advertising rates for that much space. Let’s not forget TV. Channel 3 constantly trumpets their “caring companies of Central Illinois” Let’s ask those caring companies to pay for PSAs from the school district rather than just “drug free Illinois” and the like. There is likely not time in the evening news to give it to public schools but like getting on the radio, the morning “news” shows have hours to fill. How do we get on their radar screen?

If we do it right, we can make some of these efforts at public communication educational tools as well. Uni high kids are on WILL every now and again, why not the community school district too? A decent microphone and some software along with a quiet room would give us rudimentary radio capability. The Urbana public access TV people solicit the public to come in and do a show. They are willing to do as much or as little technical work as is needed.

A final idea I have about this is back to public meetings. I think it would be cool (if we could be sure that some people show up to make it worthwhile) to have quarterly study sessions where nothing is going to be decided and use it for two things. Semi annually a brainstorming session. What ideas do the people of the community have? It could be as ill formed or as polished as they like to make it and on any topic. Have an idea for lunches? about sports? orchestra? Think there is a better way to handle bus discipline? I think the more minds we have working on this the better and I really think those meetings could be fun. The other meeting I would have (though I hope they are poorly attended) is a gripes meeting. Is there something you really need to get off your chest? Come talk to us and if it is personnel related, we could have a closed portion as well (assuming it’s legal).

We don’t need to spend tons of money to accomplish our goals but we need to reconnect with the people of Champaign in order to do anything well.

Poverty and the Nation’s Report Card

Candidate Questions

Evaluating Superintendent Culver

Chicago’s Boring Store

Chip Bruce had some great insight about the disconnect between the rhetoric and the reality in NCLB. In broad strokes, no one wants any child left behind, everyone wants accountable schools. But the way the law is done has so many unintended consequences and poorly constructed regulations that there is no match between the rhetoric and actual legislation.

Brenda Koenig did a great presentation making what seemed like dozens of great points (some of which you’ll find independently here like community and relationships). My question when she was done was how many hours has she spent learning about this? More importantly for the rest of us, how can we use her expertise to benefit our own community, schools and children.

“No Child Left Behind: What Changes Are Needed?”, will be at 7 p.m. Thursday at the Champaign County Farm Bureau, 801 N. Country Fair Drive, C.

See the N-G article here

The panelists for the discussion are: Brenda Koenig, a parent and PTA member at South Side Elementary School in Champaign; Patricia Lewis, Champaign’s interim assistant superintendent for achievement and a retired principal; Tracy Luchik, president of the Urbana Education Association and a middle school teacher; Kathleen Smith, math instructor at the University of Illinois and a 30-year veteran of public education; and Bertram (Chip) Bruce, professor of UI’s Graduate School of Library and Information Science.

Foreign language proposal: Dr. Culver’s first response was to talk about lengthening the school day, especially at the elementary level. He has said this many times before and reiterated that Champaign has the shortest school day of any district “he has been exposed to”. Then immediately he states that the barrier to extending the school day is the teacher’s union. If the Board has the length of school stated in the contract they are foolish. The length of the work day for teachers is certainly relevant but how long school is open isn’t something the union can reasonably speak to. (Stay with me here – I’m still on the teacher’s side!) So given the assumption that the board isn’t foolish why can’t we extend the school day without extending the work day for individual teachers. Hypothetically let’s assume an elementary teacher teaches for six hours a day. That is 7:30 to 3 assuming a thirty minute lunch. Why can’t we build into the day guaranteed 90 minutes of time when they don’t have to teach and use that time for the students to be with a different teacher. It could even be scheduled for the end of the day (like a mandatory after-school program) so the teachers could leave at the same time they do now (if that is a part of the existing contract). It is even easier for high school. Let’s have a twelve period day, individual teachers each teach what they teach now but everyone has a modified start time. Drama and music teachers are already not leaving at 3, let’s let them not come in until 10 or 11.
From what I know, there are presently too many work rules for teachers. They have to be in the building at a certain time, can’t leave until a certain time. Have to supervise the hallways or any number of other duties. One of the cheapest ways I know to make teachers happier is to treat them like adults. Hire non certified staff for all positions which supervise students (but them train them for consistent application of discipline standards). Even if we pay a living wage, the wage scale for non certified staff is much lower than a teacher salary and there is no TRS retirement contribution. One of the valid reasons for teacher work rules is to be accessible to parents. I don’t buy that. Professors have stated office hours that they set. They will always be in the office during the stated hours available to speak to students (or whomever). That system can work for K-12 teachers also. Most teachers I know give out a phone number, the school should have employee specific voice mail but even if they do not then let’s put something in the contract about returning phone calls promptly rather than oppressive work rules that debases our teaching staff.
In general I thought the teachers who put together the report seemed afraid. My impression was that they knew they couldn’t get much so they didn’t ask for much. That is a decent strategy but not one that fosters excellence. Rather it seems like the report was written in an atmosphere of fear. foreign language teachers have to be aware of the linguistic research that asserts innate language learning ability in young children. Why not take advantage of that? Why soft pedal languages in the younger years when they are no unready for so much In an all day kindergarten program half of it has to be instructions. Why not build language into that space. Perhaps experts would call it immersion but it could work! The early grades are so much about “getting ready”. The students learn the culture of school more than they learn math or any of that. Let’s teach them the culture of school in some other language. It seems true that we have innate language ability. Math and science is more obviously learned, so let’s be creative and put language into the curriculum in a meaningful way. Finally, I was disheartened that the team thought so little of the language learning ability of our students (and were so constrained by accreditation issues) that they recommended a year of high school language be over two years in middle school. I don’t know how language is usually taught but that pace is so slow as to be painful. A middle schooler is not that much less motivated, teachable or whatever as to learn half as much as someone a single year older than they not a quarter as much as a college student only four years older. Teach the course faster, see if you can get two periods every other day in exchange for some other class doing the same. Show some initiative or creativity rather than recommending we keep doing the same old tired plan that I did myself back in 1978. If accreditation is an issue then assess. We do that so well now anyway, let the students test into their placement in high school then you needn’t worry about the accreditation issues at all.

This is already too long, I will write more about the Board meeting soon.