Education: Pay for Performance
Tremendous things are happening in public education!
It seems that citizens, educators and policymakers are on the same page (imagine that!) regarding the merit of performance-based pay for teachers. The (very) tough thing, of course, is to figure out how we go about it.
This past session, the Legislature passed SB 281, which provides $20,000,000 for the districts to figure out a pay-for-performance ("PFP") plan that they believe works best for them. (This is one of the loosest appropriations I've ever seen: "figure out how you're going to spend the money, let us know what you're doing, let us know how it went, and good luck!"). All districts, except one I believe, are stepping up to the plate with plans. Charter schools are doing the same.
I'm particularly excited about the Washington County School District plan (and not yet familiar with other districts' plans). The WCSD plan is based on team-based goals, implementation, assessment, team-based performance, and school-based performance. How exciting! My only suggestion to that plan is that the District figure out a place for parental input/participation.
Also, the State School Board has assembled an excellent team to formulate the Board's vision of best practices for PFP. I have assembled an outstanding group in Washington County to look at PFP, among other education issues, and I encourage other legislators/citizens to do the same in their area.
Better dialogue really is only made possible by better dialogue. So, let's all get working on this project.
UPDATE (6/27/08): Last night, I was invited to a meeting at George Washington Academy (a charter school in St. George) where the parents/administrators discussed their performance pay plan. It looks like GWA is going to put a lot of weight on student outcomes over the course of the academic year -- but, as others are finding, the planners are grappling to figure out how best to measure outcome.
The Deseret News published a pointed editorial on the matter.
It seems that citizens, educators and policymakers are on the same page (imagine that!) regarding the merit of performance-based pay for teachers. The (very) tough thing, of course, is to figure out how we go about it.
This past session, the Legislature passed SB 281, which provides $20,000,000 for the districts to figure out a pay-for-performance ("PFP") plan that they believe works best for them. (This is one of the loosest appropriations I've ever seen: "figure out how you're going to spend the money, let us know what you're doing, let us know how it went, and good luck!"). All districts, except one I believe, are stepping up to the plate with plans. Charter schools are doing the same.
I'm particularly excited about the Washington County School District plan (and not yet familiar with other districts' plans). The WCSD plan is based on team-based goals, implementation, assessment, team-based performance, and school-based performance. How exciting! My only suggestion to that plan is that the District figure out a place for parental input/participation.
Also, the State School Board has assembled an excellent team to formulate the Board's vision of best practices for PFP. I have assembled an outstanding group in Washington County to look at PFP, among other education issues, and I encourage other legislators/citizens to do the same in their area.
Better dialogue really is only made possible by better dialogue. So, let's all get working on this project.
UPDATE (6/27/08): Last night, I was invited to a meeting at George Washington Academy (a charter school in St. George) where the parents/administrators discussed their performance pay plan. It looks like GWA is going to put a lot of weight on student outcomes over the course of the academic year -- but, as others are finding, the planners are grappling to figure out how best to measure outcome.
The Deseret News published a pointed editorial on the matter.
posted by steve u. at 6/19/2008
Subscribe
7 Comments:
Pay for performance is really exciting! I hope that the school districts and other groups come up with some good plans. PFP will do more to improve our schools than anything in a long time.
Performance pay should be based on credentials and graduate work, not on student performance.
Anon.,
That's not "performance." That's our current step and lane.
This really is promising. I didn't know educators were supporting the idea too. It is rare that UEA is on the right side when it comes to merit pay for great teachers.
Good luck!
Steve,
What I like about the plan is that the legislature allowed the districts and charters to determine how to make this work. Not only does strategic, site-based decision-making raise achievement, it demonstrates trust.
I also support the Washington County School District's team-based approach.
Thanks...Craig.
nThe math teachers in Provo who have students passing the state test above 97% while the state average is 67% should qualify for a good raise. They are in the central city schools. Get their methodology and incorporate it state wide. Ron
Unfortunately, what is already happening in Washington County is that some administrators are simply looking at how to equally share the performance pay among all teachers rather than atually require performance. Same ole story.
Post a Comment
<< Home