Measure 60: Teacher Pay

AIR DATE: Tuesday, September 23rd 2008
Should teacher pay raises be based on classroom performance?

People have often asked me how we produce our shows. I thought I could best answer it with an actual example. Consider this a little look behind the production curtain:

In preparation for tomorrow's show about the teacher pay ballot measure, I did a search for articles about Oregon teachers and merit pay. A very informative Oregonian article appeared that said "how much Oregon teachers are paid, and how they are paid, is of increasing public interest." (Unfortunately I can't link it it because it's in their archives. Looking behind the curtain doesn't include Lexis-Nexis access!) It went on to detail a ballot initiative that Bill Sizemore was planning that would "base raises for public employees on merit, not seniority, and would eliminate layoffs based solely on seniority." The article was written in 1996; voters rejected the initiative in 2000.

If I had searched our own Think Out Loud site I also would have found our April 29 show that asked "Is increasing teacher pay the means to a better education?" This show also mentioned Sizemore -- and the initiative he had planned for this year: Measure 60.

Now here we are with mere weeks to go before people sit around their kitchen tables to decide how to vote on this year's ballot initiatives. Measure 60 would mandate basing teacher pay raises and retention on classroom performance, not seniority.

The TOL staff debated whether the show was necessary. A similar initiative has been on the ballot before, and a similar show has been on our air in the past. But the immediacy of this election won out. Voters will need to decide on Measure 60 this year, and so I felt it was important to cover the measure within this season's election programming. While our past show touched on the issue, this one will focus specifically on it.

So, here we go: what do you think of Measure 60? Should teacher pay increases, and retention, be based on performance or seniority? Are you an administrator who wants to attract and retain more new, young teachers? Are you a teacher who wants your years of service to be the deciding factor in how you are compensated? Did you vote on Sizemore's iniative in 2000? How will your vote change this year (if at all)? What do you think of merit pay?

Tagged as: 2008 election · education · measure 60

Thank you for bringing up this important issue. As a teacher, I completely understand why people are tempted to vote for this bill. It seems like common sense to demand that a worker, particularly a public servant, should show results. We are, after all, entrusted with the most precious of "commodities", the gems of parents' hearts, the very future of our world.
However, merit pay as it is being proposed is not the answer. It will simply punish those teachers who take on the most difficult jobs, such as teaching special education students or English language learners, or working in high-poverty schools. Standardized test scores will most likely be the basis of a merit-pay system, while these tests have been shown to have only limited success in demonstrating student mastery of subjects.
Teachers must certainly show success in teaching via student growth, but the formula used for merit-based pay is too simplistic and will ultimately harm the most needy students.
Teachers are not the enemy, nor the chief impediment to the betterment of public education. We go into our profession out of love and dedication, making on average less than others with similar educations. It is time we changed the tone of the debate from attacking teachers to re-ordering our priorities. We should focus our energies on creating smaller classes, offering more hands-on, service-based learning, as well as other improvements. Our schools should not feel like they are constantly under fire. They should be lauded and assisted as much as they are criticized. After all, we are all responsible for the well-being of our youth, and will either benefit from, or pay for, the degree to which we support public education.
hajijosh —
Tomorrow during your show I will be facing a class of middle school children in an inner city school who have formitable economic, social and health challenges. Nevertheless, they will produce beautiful artworks (my subject) and show their indominable spirit and character. They will also probably not pass the standardized tests that judge their academic progess, although my efforts and the those of all the other extraordinary people in my building will raise the level. Should my salary be decided on not being able to raise these kids to a standard based on white privelage and economic advantage? No. I should be compensated EXTRA for making it work at best or better than expected and making a positive connection despite the challenges of this job.
hokusai —
Your salary should be based on the improvement they make while in your classroom, not whether they perform as well as students with more advantages. You can't possibly be suggesting that your performance should not be measured. Surely you must understand that this sounds absolutely laughable by society at large.
fatmidwesternwhiteguy —
Just because our pay isn't connected to our performance doesn't mean that our performance is not measured. Teachers in my school who are not meeting the expectations of the community end up having regular meetings with a principal and end up on plan of assistance. If that doesn't work out, then they can be terminated. I am held accountable by the community and my supervisor.
michellela —
I have been teaching for over 30 years. I have taught students from low income families and I have taught children of families of more substantial means. I can tell you that my heart is truly with the teachers at schools serving children of poverty. They need the best, most experienced teachers. Those of us with experience really DO make a difference in our student success rates: check the research! Yet the daily work is so much more difficult, that we tend to look toward moving into schools where the students are easier to manage, as we gain years of teaching experience. There's no getting around it: if you reward the teachers of high achieving classrooms, the best teachers will move FROM those more challenging classrooms, where test scores are held lower due to societal challenges beyond teacher control, into classrooms where more money can be earned.
It is true that there are documented cases where self-sacrificing teachers like Mr Holland and others, have had great success under very difficult circumstances, but those teachers also sacrificed their own families and personal lives in the process. You will not get high numbers of teachers willing to sacrifice it all, to earn a few hundred extra dollars of merit pay. More of the best teachers will simply move to where the monetary rewards are greater,and the daily tasks are more manageable.
In addition to this effect, you will see a competition to get the highest achieving students assigned to the classrooms of "certain favored" teachers. The lower achieving students will be assigned to the teachers with the least clout. Think about it. Don't you see that this will happen?
Then there's the issue about who will get assigned to work with the clusters of "TAG" students: will it be the teacher who is best equipped to work with their quirky styles? Or will it be the teacher who, again, has the most clout, who then will drill them so they can "boost the test scores", an outcome that is often not the best approach for these special learners?
This initiative is so full of great ideals, but when you try to figure out how to structure the reward system to get the desired effect, there isn't a structure that will really get the money where you are trying to get it. The current system is not really based SOLEY on experience: it's also got an educational level factored in. I think this is a good system. What we really need to get rid of the awful teachers that we all know are present in our system, is PRINCIPALS WHO WILL STEP UP AND DO THE EVALUATING AND SUPERVISING THAT THEY ARE ASSIGNED TO DO!!!!! If they did their job, those incompetent teachers would be removed. The union contracts do NOT prevent the removal of poor teachers. They do contain a level of protection to assure that angry parents are not able to singlehandedly get a teacher that they don't like removed. That structure is often used as a cloak to hide behind, when supervisors don't want to do their job. The fact is, there IS a process for the improvement of teacher quality, and the removal of teachers who refuse to comply with the expectations. Principals just have to follow that process. I have seen it at work. It's not impossible.
I am so glad you are airing a show on this topic. I wish I could listen, but I'll be teaching. I will definitely catch it on the podcast. Good luck! Thank you for inviting me to have my say tonight!
tchrLu —
I am the parent of a kindergartener. I am new to the intrest in all of this. I have sought the wisdom of others in deciding where to send our daughter.
One friend a teacher was commenting as she was a teacher in a good school w/ good scores said she would like to take the credit, but acknowledged that much of the credit is to be attributed to parent involvement. I think what tchrlu is saying is exactly right. Teachers will gravitate to the "easy" schools and the schools who truely need the outstanding teachers will get the duds. I am still in search of the best way to advocate for my childs education. If we had the funds I would put her in private school, but for now I will do my best to supplement what she gets at school and check into charter schools, and getting class sizes SMALLER!!!!!

mageeraej —
It isn't just that teachers gravitate to "easier" schools. It is partly a question of "burn out." Working with the extreemly needy children is taxing. After a few years, for may teachers it is a question of leaving teaching or teaching in a different situation.

Hcgraves —
I'm a former middle school teacher, who worked very hard, and consistently went beyond the call in order to reach and motivate my students. However, I am completely opposed to this measure. Why completely do away with seniority? Teachers definitely get better with experience; I have never known it otherwise. Not even allowing seniority to be part of the salary decision makes no sense. Mainly, however, I worry because "merit" is so subjective. Who would decide? A principal who liked you? Or didn't? How could there be consistency statewide? The only way is even more standardized tests, ugh! I have two kids in public schools, and they already have too many tests.
If you really want to attract great teachers, first lower the class sizes! Then, allow and encourage creativity. This can be done better without this ballot measure.
Thank you,
Joy Marshall
Joy Marshall —
Bill Sizemore is at it again! Doesn't he know the voters have had enough? This time, he's bringing back the SAME ballot measures we already said "no" to before. Why is not respecting the will of the voters? Like a bad meatloaf coming back with heartburn, here he goes again, wasting taxpayer dollars by forcing the Secretary of State's office to count and verify signatures — despite his court conviction on fraud — and adding further time and expense just to count all the votes. Sizemore is known for writing his proposals so INEPTLY that lawmakers have been forced to correct his mistakes for him, as in measures 47 and 50, delaying the rule of law and wasting our scant public resources even more. Furthermore, in a time when unemployment is up, Wall Street is collapsing, and many Oregonians are struggling just to meet their basic needs, Sizemore insists on hijacking the electoral process by letting ONE out of state millionaire, Loren Parks, bankroll his entire operation. Democracy should come from the people, not ONE MAN living in Nevada who can afford to dictate the political process with his millions.

As for measure 64, I am not a teacher, nor a public employee — but I CARE about the future of our beautiful state. The reality is that paying teachers based on merit means forcing them to "teach to the test," rather than teaching to the hearts and minds of our children. We should be encouraging them to grow as individuals, not turning them into sterile test-taking robots. Furthermore, no teacher, no matter how gifted, can FORCE anyone to do well on a test. Sadly, there will always be a handful of unmotivated students who do not care about school and could care even less about flunking a test. Measure 64 gives way too much power to these few unruly, disruptive students who may intentionally fail their tests, simply to lower the pay of teachers they do not like. By contrast, a well rounded education should encourage students to do well by fostering a love of learning from deep within, rather than harnessing them with the undue burden of passing or failing solely for the sake of their teacher's pay.

After all, if we base teacher pay on test scores, who will want to teach the students who need our help the most? It's the students with learning disabilities or those from abusing homes who need our best teachers the most. But these are the very groups who tend to perform the worst on standardized tests. By linking pay to the tests, we discourage our best and brightest educators from being willing to work in the worst parts of town, or in the classes where their help is needed the most. Do we really want a system where no one wants to work in special education, or at an alternative school, simply because the kids may not perform as well on tests? If anything, it is those very teachers who have sacrificed the most, and they are the ones who should be paid the best. As usual, Sizemore got it backwards again.
GentlePerson2 —
I think the issue of pay for performance v. seniority is a distraction issue.

It's an issue that creates mistrust and breeds fear - two of Bill Sizemore's favorite past times. He and his ilk would dismantle secular public education, referring to the separation of church and state as a hoax. He represents a hostile-to-children attitude that continues to plague various segments of the U.S. population and crosses a wide range of socio-economic groups. But Bill Sizemore doesn't want you to talk about that. In fact, a lot of people don't want to talk about that.

It would be helpful to spend money on debate-instruction. Kids must know how to debate Bill Sizemore's arguments about everything from race relations to constitutional law. But he doesn't want that. He wants to institute (or re-institute) corporal punishment and ban the teaching of evolution. He wants a specific kind of Christian education. From non-Christians, he wants to hear only silence.
He doesn't want kids to have meals at school. He'd rather punish kids because they're poor.

Instead of talking about all of this, he wants you to talk about teacher pay. He wants you to get rid of the people who work the hardest to give every child the skills to think for themselves because they're the most dangerous kinds of teachers.

And he loves those principals who create the worst, most hostile school environments. He calls them orderly and Christian, though I'm not sure that Jesus would agree. Would Bill Sizemore propose a performance pay for administrators ballot measure? I doubt it.

So, keep talking about teacher pay - Bill Sizemore will thank you and he'll save you money...and then he'll really give you something to cry about - a school you wouldn't wish on your worst enemy's children.

Jenny
JennyinKenton —
At face value, the idea of basing a teacher's pay upon performance sounds like a wonderful idea; however, it does not take into account that states like Oregon have one of the fastest growing rates of non-native English speaking immigrants to our state who are placed into mainstream classrooms. These students perform poorly on exams, fail classes, and create a false measure of the teacher's ability to perform his or her job.
mydogatemyemail —
Achievement is always based off of standardized tests. How well someone does on these tests depends more on how well they take tests than how well they learn.

My daughter, who has her masters, didn't take tests well. She did OK with tests, but always did well on the labs and projects she did. She really struggled with standardized tests. She had taken the test to get into grad school several times. During middle school it was a struggle to getting her into classes that would challenge her. If we had relied on standardized tests, she would have been bored in simple classes and may not have finished high school.

My son was very different. He took tests very well. He takes after me. He has his bachelors.

Standardized test scores make people feel good, but aren't a good indication of learning. There is a second big factor in children's successes. That their parents involvement. At high school parent teacher conferences, we had finished standing in a long line for one teacher and were standing in a long line for another teacher. We talked to a teacher who was reading the paper because there was no one there to see him. We asked what he taught. It was science. We said it was odd he didn't have anyone because we had just stood in a long line to see a science teacher. His reply was, "that's because Dr. Helmen has the advanced students." I then realized, that we had seen the same parents at parent-teacher conferences and other events. It's the parents who are involved with their children's education that have the good students.
Rick00 —
It always seems to me that we are going about this all wrong. How can we expect teachers to be teachers, parents, counselors, baby-sitters and then "grade" them on just being teachers. As Rick says, Parent involvement is key so let's encourage it. Parents get to take a tax credit just for having kids. Let's change that. They get 5 years of child tax credit for merely being able to breed, but after that, tie their credit to their child's performance in school. The better grades, the higher the credit.
PDXListener —
Outstanding idea, maybe you should start an initiative...
michellela —
As an educator and taxpayer, I believe that the questions you posted to discuss this issue are misdirected. That is because they miss the historical context of the discussion.

First, the United States of America is one of the few nations that attempts to educate all students. For example, the TIMMS gets a lot of attention as proof that our educators don't teach our kids science and math as well as teachers in other countries. The TIMMS report compares our students' scores with countries that do not educate special populations, including native speakers of other languages and students with disabilities is comparing apples to oranges. If you want to investigate this further, host Bill Daggett to discuss this reality.

Second, one might consider starting the discussion to 1990 instead of 2000. The context of this discussing goes back to Measure 5, which limited county property tax support for education. The responsibility for supporting education was shifted to the state. All of a sudden, education was viewed as a greedy competitor for state funds. But salaries cost a lot of money and there are many teachers throughout this state. If someone wants to compare how much money the education system costs, perhaps we should talk about the number of teachers funded through the state budget versus the number of employees of other, lesser-funded departments. For instance, the state police should never be compared to education as a proportion of the state budget.

NCLB requires us to compare performance from one class of students against another group of students that goes through a teachers' class the following year. Again, let's compare apples to apples instead of group one to group two.

Finally, please take into special consideration the speaker who started your conversation. Oregon Connections Academy is not an acceptable representative of Charter Schools nor of public schools. You might look at the legislature's response to Oregon Connections Academy's practices in the session following their opening.

Thank you for considering my input.
factvsopinion —
I have a team of people working for me that are mostly older, and sometimes much older than I am. It's not about whether any one individual is more effective with more experience. It's about whether or not they are more effective than their co-workers. This is shocking, shocking stuff.
fatmidwesternwhiteguy —
My short answer is this:

I think that how we compensate our teachers is a direct reflection on how we value our children.
Lainie —
One of the mistakes that the government always makes when it tries to do something like this, is that they don't understand that measuring performance and making adjustments based on observation is a continuous process. You don't just put the measurement in place and never change it. You put the measurement in place, see if it is working to guide your process, whatever it is, in this case teaching, and adjust what and how you measure and continuously improve.
fatmidwesternwhiteguy —
Unfortunately this is a problem bigger than just merit pay or the talent/skill of teachers. It is really a problem of the public education system. There is more focus on test scores, standardized testing and statistics. You have a caller on right now, Linda, that is talking about this exact situation.

Once public education can focus on the ENTIRE child, their family life, their stress levels, their learning style, then we will truly see results of learning and actually retaining information.

I have worked in public schools for the past 3 years as an after-school instructor and coordinator. I had the pleasure of working for an amazing school in the North Clackamas School Dist. This school was a well oiled machine because of the Principal and V.P. establishing a environment of respect and community. Teachers worked together to achieve success with students and each teacher's individual skill was appreciated and used to it't best ability. So if we can't change the system then we need people within the system that find a way to appreciate teachers and therefore retain them.

Thank you for having this discussion.
Kaiglightner —
None of this is any different from any company in the private sector. You need to attract and retain the best employees. In order to do this, you need to provide an environment that they want to work in. That doesn't mean that you don't hold them accountable for setting and meeting objectives. Come on!! In fact, one of the things that harms employee morale the most is when people are NOT held accountable. This makes the employees who really do work hard resentful of those who don't. They want to find a place where their efforts are recognized and rewarded.
fatmidwesternwhiteguy —
What about Oregon City & Forest Grove High School programs as successful teaching programs?
Get input from them.
Teachers, artists, scientists do well if they love what they are doing.
We do not need merit pay. We do not need to consider free market.
Do not need competition!

Also your pro-M60 needs to be a brick and mortar school system.
There are many questions about online charter schools alone.
cabbagebnb —
As a parent I am in favor of anything that can change the current school bureaucracy. We need more opportunities, flexability and options. Children are not being served, families are not being served, communities are not being served.

We are home schooling because of the dismal state of education. I resisted the whole idea of home schooling thinking we just couldn't do it. Now I am amazed at how well it is working, how much my child is choosing to learn and becoming self directed, for example last night he asks me "what do you think, which is harder German or Japanese?" I am thinking about studying another language (he has already studied spanish and can put together his own sentences, with pronouns, even if clumsy). And this student was a 'bad' student in public education.
mahalu —
Consider how much Medical Doctors are paid for seeing a child a few hours a year to help create a healthy child and then contrast that with the many many hours a teacher spends with that same child trying to help her become a mentally healthy, well educated, and contributing member of society.

It is obvious to me that our public school teachers are incredibly undervalued in far too many ways, and the most basic of those is in pay.

Teachers ought to be more highly compensated than Medical Doctors, they have far more and more serious responsibilities and that fact should be reflected in the pay.

Teachers are an investment, not a cost.
Tom D Ford —
I'm appalled that the last guest (the one who is compared teaching to a sales job) thinks that a purely performance-based system can work in public schools. The last thing we need is for talented, experienced teachers to have a DISINCENTIVE to take the toughest teaching assignments. The pay scheme in Measure 60 would mean that good, experienced teachers who take the toughest teaching assignments could get lower raises or lower pay than new teachers who are in easier teaching assignments.
jdstewart —
In a sales job, the results of the worker's efforts are evident at once. In teaching, it is often many years before the true effectiveness of that teacher can be measured.

The "tough" teacher a student resented at one time, is often remembered with greatest appreciation later in life.
Hcgraves —
Oregon Connections Academy is a program that is CHOSEN by the students. The poor farm kid just said that people should not be allowed to pick and choose which school they attend - he would have no students attending OCA. He's saying one thing about education and doing another.
JennyinKenton —
Conservatives like Sizemore keep cutting our taxes, which undercuts our schools, which results in under-performing schools and kids, which the Sizemores then use as an excuse to cut taxes for our schools.

Conservatives like Sizemore and Loren Parks are the problem that needs to be fixed, not our teachers!
Tom D Ford —
As a former TFA teacher, I am a fan of responsible merit pay (and higher pay for teachers in general), but as has been continuously pointed out, it would be incredibly irresponsible to approve a bill that purports to do this without any guidelines as to how to determine what counts as merit.
lillianruelle —
Measure 60 is a great idea! I love the idea of the "free" market in the schools. Greed has done wonders for our economy--why not infuse the care and education of our children with money grubbing? Cool!
sisterlouise —
Back when Liberals and moderate Republicans were in government we educated our kids so well that we went to the moon and all the rest of the world cheered us on, now that we have had Conservative Republicans in government for many decades, we have financial disasters, under performing schools and kids, a lot of the world hates us, and we have never-ending wars.

Let's throw the Conservative Republican bums out and get our nation back on track!
Tom D Ford —
what do you think of Measure 60?

As a method for dealing with complicated issues, using the Initiative to solve problems is seriously flawed.

First, the language is too vague. Listening to your guests, I am struck by how they read the same words and get to different interpretations.

Second, Bill Sizemore did not offer the measure for its merit. He makes a good living from proposing Right Wing ideas that hurt their enemies, such as "the liberal school teachers."

Third,the legislative process gets a better result, because (1) statutes define the terms used in a law, (2) knowledgeable people offer specific language to become law, (3) the statute is not merely an amorphous concept like this Initiative and, at least part of the time, (4) skilled and experienced attorneys shape the law.

kiriwonderdog —
I think this will discourage potentially good new teachers. I have my teaching degree and taught for a short time before I realized that it was not really about preparing students for the future at all. It was about preparing students for tests, teaching them how to behave in a classroom, juggling students with learning disabilities and dealing with whatever new reform the polititians come up with, all with large class sizes. I do not know how this helps students. Did I want to do all that on teacher pay? No thanks!

Thank goodness there are people out there willing to deal with all this and trying to make meaningful connections with students too.
lisam johnson —
As a beginning teacher, I find it very intimidating that this ballot is even being considered. Teachers are like fine wine, in that as they age in their profession, they become more effective, confident and successful with students, administration, fellow colleagues and parents. Ballot Measure 60 seemingly does not acknowledge that becoming worthy of a merit based system takes time. It doesn't happen over night, it takes years to be the best one can be. If Ballot Measure 60 passes, it is going to put EVEN MORE pressure on new educators who already have enough anxiety as they begin to learn how to operate their own classroom. I also believe that Ballot Measure 60 would cause division between those teachers who have merit pay and those who do not. This is absolutely dangerous, in that teachers need to be united in the workplace because working relationships are essential in the schools.

Also, I think that Measure 60 wants to provide a scapegoat for what is wrong with education today. Teachers are not the ONLY answer to kids struggling in schools, standardized tests, abusive/broken home environments, poverty, social minority, learning disabilities, etc. Teachers are part of the solution, but they cannot be expected to "fix" the many challenges that kids come to school with. Parents need to be more actively involved in the education of their children and take responsibility for the choices their kid is making while at school. As a first year middle school teacher in Eastern Oregon, it seemed that the students who struggled the most behaviorally, socially and academically usually had absent parents or no parental authority that cared enough to bring them into line. It is time to stop blaming teachers for the many challenges found in education. After all, it takes an entire village, to raise a child.

Finally, I feel that many administrators are not doing all they could do in leading schools to face the challenges and issues concerning the education of their students. I have met "people in power" in the school system who seemingly lost their passion and drive to work to solve the issues at hand. They seem to only be there for their title and to keep the status quo going. There is no leadership for change, no creative, innovative problem solving going on...just someone there to collect a pay check every month. This has got to change. I think school administration carries way to much power, and that teachers and parents need to be empowered to deal with the issues, struggles and problems not only found in their classrooms, but in their school and school district. It is the teachers who are out in the trenches everyday dealing with kids who are struggling. These teachers know what the school is up against. In my experience, I have not seen school administration working alongside "in the trenches" with teachers. Can you imagine a school system where school administration would be required to teach in a classroom on a regular basis in order to keep in touch with what is really going with the student population? I think that would be revolutionary.
oregon girl 75 —
the person who spoke against joining a teachers union, the person who seemed to speak way too much on your show today, is to me the sort of intellect which should be allowed almost no major input into any sort of decision. It is neither that she spoke so much, nor that she was averse to the union which leads me to this opinion, i use these only to identify her of whom i now write.
That person exhibits what i would call a cheerleader sort of mentality. The person is a complete victim of her prejudices and clique-ism. i listen to that sort of person speak, and there is no doubt in my mind that should she have much say in anything, it will go wrong. Her manner is obstructionistic, she will never reconsider unless her clique undergoes some sort of transformation in belief, and belief has so little to do with thought and so much to do with trying to fit in, without thought.

Coincidentally, this is exactly the sort of person which has been nominated by the republicans for VP - a useless intellect for an underutilized position- a recipe for corruption and disaster.

We have no hope as either nation or world with folks like this doing anything more than mowing the lawn. If they will not train themselves, their gift of mind, then they should never be allowed to dictate for others, nor have anything to do with the formation of the opinions necessary when fact or knowledge is for some reason lacking.
MyPointofView —
Bill Sizemore is sponsoring BM60 which is all one needs to know to vote NO!
lindberj —
I have been a Teacher-Librarian in public schools in the South and in Oregon from 1970 until my retirement in 2000.

One of the problems I see in attempting to develop a system for evaluating teacher effectiveness is that not all students learn in the same way, or have the same educational needs.

I have known teachers who were first rate in helping children who come to school with truly deprived backgrounds. They are able to bring students who begin third grade reading at a kindergarten level to upper second grade level, and make similar advances in arithmetic. However, these teachers often are not able equally to inspire advancement for the students who enter the third grade reading at an eighth grade level and full of curiosity about history, science, and the world about them.

I have seen other teachers who have little patience or skill in teaching the students who have little background or preparation for formal education, but who open broad worlds of understanding and appreciation for students who have exceptional ability and skills. They nourish the intellectual interests of these students and give them an opportunity for a broader and more rewarding education. They most of all provide an example of the richness of a life in which learning in the broadest sense plays a major role.

I do not think that either of these teachers has greater value than the other. It is essential that basic skills are developed for all students. It is equally as important that joy in learning and explanding intellectual horizons be part of our school offerings.

Incidentally, I never failed to attempt to improve my skills as a librarian, or a teacher, because I was not offered extra pay for keeping up-to-date in the uses of technologies or learning strategies. In fact, I spent a substantial part of my salary in getting those skills because they made teaching and librarianship rewarding. This was true of the vast majority of teachers with whom I worked in schools over the years.
Hcgraves —
I'm a teacher. And what I know from almost 7 years of teaching is that teaching is a [i]talent[/i]. It's a person-to-person activity that is not easily measurable by some objective standard. Its [i]results[/i] are also not easily measurable.

But [i]people[/i] can tell. You can walk into a classroom and see if it's alive or dead. If there is a connection between the teacher and the students. If that connection is being used to do something useful.

Our current K-12 educational system is set up like a car manufacturer. Pay is based on seniority and coursework, neither of which can compensate for a lack of the basic talent. The system is set up to "stamp out" students, but too often stamps out human initiative and the joy of learning instead.

I don't know if Measure 60 is the right answer, but I'm inclined to vote for it because our current K-12 system is the wrong answer. We need something talent-based, not a giant bureacracy.

kraznayazvezda —
Are you suggesting that any change is better than no change? Removing all desks from classrooms would also be a change. So would be putting Bill Sizemore in a classroom. But I don't think either of those changes would improve the quality of education in the schools.

Measure 60s is not a change directed to the improvement of our educational system.
Hcgraves —
I'm not suggesting that "any change is better than no change." I'm suggesting that running schools as though they were car factories is not appropriate and produces the mediocre results that one might expect from applying the wrong tool to the job.
kraznayazvezda —
As I was listening to the show, I could see how easy it is to think that merit based pay is a solution to teachers whose seniority keeps them in the classroom when they probably should not still be teaching. However, when I heard the caller liken teaching to selling furniture, I had to turn off the radio for a few minutes. I am a middle school teacher who works rarely works 8 hours. Lately I have been putting in 10-12 per day and still feel overwhelmed by the amount of work I am asked to do. When the caller said that we all need an incentive/carrot, it really hit me hard. I see nearly all of the teachers at my school working long hours doing their best to keep up, and without a carrot. Do I really need my paycheck hanging over my head in order to motivate me to do my job to the best of my ability? I do as much as I can to help students learn and I am also trying to grow in my profession. I understand that accountability is important, but by what standards do we judge teachers when students arrive in the class with such a wide variety of backgrounds and economic status? I am charged with teaching every student, and I truly do my best, but there are some things beyond my control. We need to remember that kids are not couches and teachers are not salespeople.
michellela —
I sympathize, and applaud your hard work. Society need to acknowledge that not all students arrive in class ready (or even able) to learn. It's not teachers' fault when that happens.

But I think it's [i]also[/i] really important to break the "iron rice bowl" enforced by teachers' unions. I think that principals need more authority to hire and fire. Sure, by doing this you open up the possibility of abuse by bad principals. But if you [i]don't[/i] do it, you allow the deadwood to accumulate. I'd like to see schools run more like startup companies and less like giant, inflexible bureaucracies.

In that tradeoff, my priority is to see the kids get what they need. Good principals aren't going to persecute good teachers. Bad principals will need to be weeded out, just like bad teachers should be.

But you've got to break the hold of bureaucratic rules and open up some space for the flexibility and creativity of human intelligence.
kraznayazvezda —
Thankyou for the opportunity to respond and initiate conversation about this measure.

From listening to the show, I still didn't get a good idea of just how exactly this measure proposed that teachers would be measured for merit pay. Without this detail, I can't conceive of how one could approve of the measure. I don't really buy that the ambiguity of the measure in this area allows a well crafted system to emerge. I agree with Librarian teacher Martha Decherd that basing the merit pay on standardized tests alone would be dicey, and would certainly have to take into account the scores from previous assessments, each child individually...and state tests being far less than ideal for such a high stakes thing like a paycheck.

Having taught most of my life in a high poverty school (David Douglas High School in East Portland) that also had a high diversity rate, I wonder how in the world would teachers be judged for the progress of kids from other countries? Students who have had huge gaps in their education? Students who are homeless? Students who have special needs? Students who come from countries with utterly broken educational systems, arriving here next to illiterate not only in English, but in their first language as well? For a huge number of schools in Oregon, these ELL student populations are not a few isolated kids, but large percentages, and growing.

A business model is nice in business, but one of the major reform movements in education is that the mass production factory model of education that our schools emulate leaves alot of kids to slip through the cracks. Kids are not furniture or customers. They come from homes that are often a wreck, are at times more concerned about their next meal, bad home circumstances, drug use and absentee parents--either emotionally or physically.

How is it going to benefit our education system to lay these realities at the feet of teachers and tell them "fix the discrepancy, your wages depend on it." Especially when teachers are often times digging themselves into alot of school debt just so they can do a job that is meant to be inherently rewarding because of their own ability to be effective.

A kids education is like a triangle...Parents, the kid him herself and the teacher all have to be onboard and in participation in order to overcome the inevitable obstacles that will arise as that child matures. Maybe parents should be looked at for tax breaks for kids that pull their weight? Kids not making the grade mandatorily be signed up for summer school?

That said, the seniority system isn't perfect. There are teachers who have put in 20 plus years who are just plugging through the last ten to get their PERS retirement package. They are often disengaged, disillusioned with all the hoops they are made to jump through by constantly changing requirements, have hit their peak of good teaching and for many possible reasons started to just punch the clock. And there is something to be said for natural ability in teaching.

But trying to fix these problems with this punitive bandage of merit pay for teachers that isn't well spelled out, well, it only makes the teaching profession a less desirable place to be for people who have alot to offer. Competition might be good in sports or business, but in education collaboration is the way to success. Kids benefit immensely from teaching teams that bring a more well rounded point of view to subjects, not that compete against each other for what...? a raise?

The majority of middle school teachers that I have come across work far more than an 8 hour day. I can speak personally that I cannot give what it takes to be a teacher right now and I spend time raising kids. I need a job with hours, not a job that is a way of life, which is largely what teaching is.
hb1736 —
Reply to hb1736. You have stated many of my points in an exceptionally well composed response. I have spent the majority of my adult life in social services which has included schools, prisons, private and public social service agencies. I have repeatedly questioned the popular position of expecting teachers and schools to be responsible for a wide range of factors outside of their control. Its not politically correct to hold parents responsible on a daily basis for their children entering school prepared and motivated to learn. The pint elephants in every school and classroom are the family culture of each child with respect to their attitude toward education and learning, whether the child regularly gets enough sleep, a structured household which requires the child to have a home environment which supports opportunties to study, and a host of other factors which impact the child's ability to benefit from school. And yet, schools and teachers are the only ones who are held accountabie ?

During the course of my career I have entered many homes with children in which the family household was in such disarray and confusion it would be impoosible for any teacher or school to effectively address on an educational level.

I speak with some authority as I came from such a home. But one teacher in 7th grade took an interest in me and became my mentor. He had the permission of my parents on several occasions to take me to his home to visit his family. Such visits sparked my interest in reading and learning. He mentored me through high school and my undergraduate education. I went on to complete graduate school. One teacher made the difference in my life. I have passed it on several times. Given today's climate no teacher would put such energy into a child and certainly not take them home. I will forever remain thankful to that teacher and remember him until the day I die.

MeanMachine2 —
[i]That said, the seniority system isn't perfect. There are teachers who have put in 20 plus years who are just plugging through the last ten to get their PERS retirement package. They are often disengaged, disillusioned with all the hoops they are made to jump through by constantly changing requirements, have hit their peak of good teaching and for many possible reasons started to just punch the clock. And there is something to be said for natural ability in teaching.[/i]

This is the point I keep trying to make. Perhaps Measure 60 isn't the way. But who else is proposing the necessary change? Certainly not the teachers' union or the school boards. And given that, frustration builds to the point where anything that's offered looks better than the status quo.
kraznayazvezda —
This statement is applicable to any profession or job for that matter. Doctors, politicians, roofer, CEO, dentist, plummber, etc. The problem appears to be inadequate and/or ineffective supervision and/or management from the legislature to the principal. Teachers, as any and all workers should be held accountable to perform at an acceptable level. But such accountability must be fair and effective. Given the host of factors outside of the classroom which significantly affect students ability to benefit from classroom instructions even from the most dedicated and gifted teacher, merit pay as currently presented is neither fair nor effective. Merit pay must be structure and based on the factors over which teachers have contraol. To date I know of no such system or plan. I am not a teacher and I do not play one on TV; and neither is any member of my family or close friends involved in the profession. I have a daughter who successfully completed a public education before going to graduate from Reed College and graduate degree from Princeton. I have another one who is just beginning her public education.
MeanMachine2 —
This sort of thing does more to divide the balance of staff in indivdual schools. It is hard to imagine that there could be a actual way for some administrator to decide who is doing well as a teacher or not. As a teacher for 21 years I see more downside for this issue. It would cause more poeple to leave the teaching profession, which to me is a calling and not just a job. Most teachers stay in teaching because they love the job. They feel like it is a way to give back to the community. All the things that teachers are asked to do now makes the job almost impossible and yet all the ones I have known stay because they love the students and feel as if they are making a difference. Bill Sizemore has always tried to undermine teachers any way he can and I feel that people should do things like go to the schools and see for themselves how the teachers are making do with less money and doing more and more for their students.
mgerke —
[i]It is hard to imagine that there could be a actual way for some administrator to decide who is doing well as a teacher or not.[/i]

Really? It's easy for me to imagine. The administrator observes the classroom and can see whether the teacher is working with energy, commitment, and talent. That's not allowed by current bureaucratic rules, but I think it's actually the [i]only[/i] way to actually make that determination.
kraznayazvezda —
In every school I have ever worked, the administrators do observe the teachers teaching, at least once a year. God help us if our pay scale was based on the results of having our boss watch us work for 45 minutes to an hour once a year. To say nothing of the inevitable bias that enters the equation with those who get along well with the principal, and those who have had a disagreement. Yeek, I can't think of a worse way to base someone's pay.
hb1736 —
Placing almost exclusive emphasis upon test-score improvement as a basis for rewarding teachers is patently unfair and, when coupled with inadequate performance-appraisal systems, drives teachers toward unethical behavior or departure to other pursuits.

A primary reason the public has not been more supportive of higher funding for education has been the poor relationship between better funding and higher educational quality as revealed by a number of studies.

Use of an appraisal system based upon the following guidelines should go a long way toward turning things around.

Those associated with schools, need to fairly identify true "stars" and "inadequate performers" as one of the bases for:

justifying good pay for outstanding teachers,

providing for self-guidance on the part of newcomers and present staff,

and providing an important basis for terminating those who cannot, or will not, measure up.

Research findings show that evaluators achieve much better agreement about who are Stars and Inadequate Performers than they do about who are Average, Above-Average, and Below-Average performers. Yet, placing individuals in the middle-three categories is a time-consuming, often arbitrary, and resentment-causing activity that most evaluators dislike having to do. Also, clearly, an average performer in a superior organization deserves much more recognition than an average performer in an inferior one. No wonder that many teachers and their unions oppose conventional merit-rating systems!

To avoid a popularity contest, assure greater fairness, and provide for constructive self-guidance, there should be behavioral documentation for both Star and Inadequate Performer nominations via the Critical Incident Technique.
To lay the groundwork for this, students, parents, veteran administrators, and experienced teachers should be polled at to what specific, observable behaviors they associate with outstanding and inadequate performance for each important aspect of a teacher's job.

Then, required behavioral documentation for Star and Inadequate-Performer nominations from fellow teachers, adminstrators, students, and parents should be based upon the most agreed-upon behaviors, and the agreed-to relative weights that should be assigned to these.

The results of this analysis can also constructively guide the initial training and subsequent selection of teachers, as well as, provide a much-needed, qualifying context for the currently over-stressed evaluation factor of test-score-improvement.

This approach also sets the stage for more productive review sessions between the rater and ratee. Since the ratee has a sound basis for self-rating, the session should start with the rater asking "How do you rate yourself for this past period through the presentation of relevant, supporting behaviors?" No rater can be all-knowing, so if behaviors are mentioned that she or he is not aware of, the rater can postpone giving his or her evaluation to provide time to check out the validity of the assertions, if this seems necessary.

A sound behavioral basis for rating also facilitates the use of motivational goal setting during the review session. For example, if the ratee wants to be a Star, what specific behavioral goals does she or he plan to adopt by such and such a time? If stardom is not the goal, which specific, Inadequate Performer behaviors will he or she need to avoid?
This approach permits a rater to be more of a counselor and coach, than one who appears to sit in arbitrary judgment.

For discussion of relevant research and related citations, see: "Improving Performance Appraisal Systems" by William M. Fox, NATIONAL PRODUCTIVITY REVIEW, Winter 1987-88, pages 20-27.

William Fox
gryfox@bellsouth.net
Professor Emeritus
Department of Management
University of Florida
(352) 376-9786
gryfox —
I DO NOT SUPPORT Measure 60. I agree with Bill Sizemore that teachers must be held accountable based on performance and NOT seniority. I have a son with special needs in high school. For 12 years we have seen time and time again that the most experienced teachers who had been working for over 15 years turned out to be the most lackadaisical! They were amazingly clueless about how to help my son even AFTER I did my due diligence of going to every school meeting and discussing with the counselors before selecting who they said was the "best" for my son! These experienced teachers were too stubborn, condescending, behaved as if I did not know my own son, and even seemed uninterested in helping him. He is very high functioning and does not exhibit any signs of his disability to a casual observer. He needed just basic intervention in the form of organization skills and class notes. We do most of the teaching at home. Do not tell me that these were isolated incidents. This happened year after year. At the same time, whenever my son was in a new teacher's class, he got just the right kind of assistance and did amazingly well. Most of his "inexperienced" new teachers were open minded, made the parents feel welcome, and went the extra step to help my son fit and feel normal. Academically, he always excelled in the new teachers' classes as compared to the highly accomplished, snotty experienced ones! I am living proof to show that seniority is not the criteria, performance is!
I am not biased and I do not get anything out of this other than the best for all children! Many of the older teachers need extensive re-training!!!!!
Poppee —
Correcting a typo to my own comment above. It must read "I SUPPORT MEASURE 60". I support Bill Sizemore's very thoughtful measures.
Poppee —
It would seem that this measure is not the answer, but it's clear that our schools are broken and we're not getting the leadership from School Boards or the Teachers Union. So was left, a draconian attempt my the voters to at least force some change, for better or worse. I'm for one know that meritocracy systems work. But only in situations where clear goals can be measured with clear results. Somehow, the competency of a teacher needs to be factored out of test scores in such a way as to indentify teachers that need improvements. Longevity and college credits is not the answer to merit pay.
TDP555 —

Comments are now closed.



Become a sponsor