By Mark
My email inbox this last week has been peppered by NBPTS SmartBrief articles with distinctly contradictory messages. First, there was the report from Tennessee that a three-year longitudinal study on merit-pay in Nashville revealed that merit pay had no impact on student learning. Then, quick to follow, was a rebuttal from an administrator in Texas arguing that merit-pay does impact student performance. And, lo and behold, Friday, I read that the feds ponied up $422 million for use in teacher merit-pay initiatives. Merit pay is certainly a "pretty" idea and a publicly palatable solution, so no wonder we're throwing millions on the bandwagon.
Personally, ten years into this business, I don't want more money for the work I do. More pay won't give me what I really need to be a better teacher. I'm dealing with finite resources here, and despite what Oprah might want America to believe about all educators, I'm not a "lazy teacher" who leaves promptly at 3:00pm to munch bon-bons during a leisurely afternoon and who has nothing better to do than complain about not being paid enough (Oprah, why all the hate?). More pay won't motivate me to work harder…since that implies that I'm not working hard enough as it is. Tempting me with more pay simply won't make me better at my job.
But give me more of something else and I guarantee you'll see a better teacher.
How about merit time?
I haven't thought this through completely, but if there is one thing which would seem like a tremendous reward for me, it would be time during my school day for collaboration with colleagues, assessment design and analysis, examination of student work, and planning. These, not more money in my bank account, would actually help me do my job even better. Instead of increasing my pay by 20% (in my case as a high school teacher, that would equate roughly to what it costs to pay me to teach a period of class), how about taking that cash and paying someone else so that I can have an extra period to do all things that will make me a better teacher?
What should I do to earn this professional time? Sure, I should have to demonstrate meaningful growth in student learning…all the things I'd have to do to earn merit pay. But think of the return on investment. If the state or district were to pay me 20% more, then I'd still be stretched between the same five periods stocked full of students. I'd still be dividing my attention 150 ways and still struggle to serve all 150 of my students well on fifty-five minutes of prep time and whatever hours of lonely planning and assessment time in the evenings between diaper changes and doing dishes and helping my own kids with homework. I'd still hesitate to assign writing tasks because of the daunting task of reading 150,000 words just to assess one mid-size writing assignment. Just one! Even if they only write a half a page, that's 75 pages of reading (not to mention the crafting of meaningful and relevant feedback) just for one task. And then there's time to plan effective lessons…
If for my meritorious teaching I were to be given the reward of time, the return on the investment would be greater: Instead of paying me money to stay stretched too thin and further burn out as the martyr teacher this country apparently holds as the minimum standard, they'd be paying me to be a better teacher.
And shouldn't the merit movement be about better teaching for better learning?
(Full disclosure: I am an NBCT, so in the State of Washington I do earn a yearly bonus…but as I've posted before, it's not just about the bonus. You'll probably notice a theme here.)
I don’t think merit pay will improve anyone’s teaching; certainly not mine. I’m already doing as well as I know how, and I’m not saving anything for the eventuality of more money.
What I will take, though, is merit supplies. I might be able to step up my game a little for the promise of dry-erase markers that work, glue that holds, a steady supply of red sharpies and those long, narrow tagboard strips that we used to be able to afford.
My husband, an elementary teacher, gets thirty minutes of prep time a day. His before and after school time is spent with parents, so it’s not available to plan. He also works far beyond the “paid” day, that imaginary teacher day that ends at 3:00.
He would love more time.
Me? I’m with you on the merit pay – I could take it or leave it. I’ve found a way to gain more time because our local university has a new co-teaching student teacher model. I’ve been lucky to have exceptional teaching candidates teach with me every year. It’s like having two teachers in the room, and I love it.
In my building two things would improve the learning of every student – getting rid of ineffective teachers (we have about 4) and finding a way to deal with truancy.
Thanks for reading, Nancy. Your phrase “what to value and what to reward” is where we as teachers need to be most influential. From the outside, measures like test scores seem logical, simple, slam-dunk assessments of teacher performance. I get that, so I don’t necessarily begrudge the outsider’s impulse to use test scores. What I do begrudge is the fact that so many policymakers and the public in general refuse to waver from their position when teachers and others come forth and present valid arguments about why test scores alone are not a consistent or even reliable measure of teacher effectiveness (they then accuse teachers of not wanting to be accountable). It’s that sense of absolutism…the “you’re either with us or against us” syndrome…which I really feel has grown exponentially in the last decade. We as a country seem unable to change course in light of new information and as a result are unwilling to change our minds once we’ve made them up. Stay the course… so egocentric.
Because there are so many unique schools and contexts all across the nation, it is ill-conceived that one uniform policy or approach is the best fit. We learn that in teacherschool: differentiation is necessary. Maybe in one school, higher pay for test scores will work. That doesn’t mean it will work everywhere. It’s the same impulse we’ve seen in school reform for years: if someone works in District A, let’s replicate it wholesale and down to the bolts in Districts B, C, and D. Cookie cutter.
Back to Oprah… that $100 million foundation set up for Newark schools–that’s fantastic for them, and I wish them well–but what I fear is that whatever success they achieve will be then expected from urban districts across the nation…who will be expected to perform without that $100 million in extra resources. Whatever we do to reform schools must be replicable and sustainable within our current funding structure, with no additional special resources which must be procured from year to year.
What I want for excellent teachers isn’t more money, but more influence: more control over their working conditions, more opportunity to shape their own work, more trust in teachers’ ability to diagnose, prescribe and set policy.
I want more, diverse genuine leadership roles for teachers in the classroom.Right now, the assumption is that policy-makers are best positioned to decide what to value and what to reward.
Interesting piece, Mark. Keep preaching.
At our elementary schools, teachers’ plans come during art, music, pe, library, etc., in 30-40 minute blocks during the week (it varies a little by school because the specials teachers travel between schools & their schedules are hard to work out). If we could find the money to hire more art, music, & pe teachers, we could provide more planning time within our current framework of how we do things–small changes, less “scary”. You could “merit” an extra slot of one of those classes each week.
I do think the team-teaching idea is interesting. Maybe more time could be provided by hiring another teacher to teach science or social studies exclusively, almost like a special–those subjects seem to get somewhat overlooked due to the overwhelming focus on reading and math. The “extra” teacher could come in a teach those subjects to the class while the primary teacher has a prep time. Also, the primary teacher could see how the “extra” teacher teaches that curriculum, too, which would help them in their planning–like a curriculum coach.
A less expensive idea I had was hiring recess supervisors–you could hire someone at a lower rate of pay for that position. That could provide an extra 30 minutes of planning time in elementary.
Since an entire grade usually has recess at the same time, it would provide opportunity to collaborate amongst your grade level. (This idea probably wouldn’t do you any good in a high school. . . I’m assuming there’s no recess. . . but maybe there’s a way to get some of your other extra duties covered that would provide you with more time?)
Thanks for responding, Rebecca. I know that the challenges faced by elementary teachers are different–but the same–as us in high school. I hear that elementary teachers might get some prep time during PE or music (where those still exist) but that’s still not enough…in my head where HS staff are generally spread too thin among many students, elementary staff are generally spread too thin within many subjects (though I know it’s more complex than that). I am curious if you can think of a model where elementary teachers could be given more “merit” time? Team teaching, maybe, where instead of 1t:30s it’s 2t:30s so one teacher’s in the lead while another preps, assesses, etc.?
I do think that putting more money in our system is a key–but it goes back to return on investment…time is a good investment.
You have elegantly stated my exact thoughts. Our elementary teachers only get 30 minutes of planning time each day. By the time they walk their class to their special areas, go to the bathroom & check their mail, they might have 15 minutes to “plan”. If it’s not taken up with a meeting or whatever. It’s just not enough time. As an association leader, I hear more complaints about lack of time to do a good job than money. Giving us more time would do more to raise acheivement than paying us more.