Come again? One would think that something as important as Merit Pay or Merit-Based Pay would fly a little farther up the news flag pole locally but sadly that is not the case. No worries, Teaching Underground has you covered. In fact we've had you covered on the topic of Merit Pay something like six times already. We will say again with a loud and unwavering voice that making kids part of the pay equation is a bad idea. Don't believe us? Keep reading.
"Merit Pay" seems like a Panacea for all that ails schools performance wise, but also financially.
Can this be so? The concept is to boost student achievement and improve our schools using bonuses for teachers. Many are supporting this flawed concept. Common sense and mounting evidence suggests Merit Pay is not only a failed solution but that it is not even an improvement. For this idea to be suggested is contrary to what most educators already know.
Nashville schools were part of the most scientific evaluation to date and after 3 years of study Matthew Springer, executive
director of the National Center on Performance Incentives announced the following:.
“We tested the most basic and foundational question
related to performance incentives — Does bonus pay alone improve student
outcomes? – and we found that it does not.”
I tend to be wary of "centers for" things but it seems prudent to point out the above name seems to suggest they would be looking for evidence that it did positively affect student performance. The RAND corporation's mission is to improve policy and decision making through research and analysis. It might seem RAND has failed on the front end part of their mission here. Meanwhile New York City, Chicago along with the State of Texas tried and abandoned such plans after showing no improvement. But here we are. Still dealing with faddish cavalier approaches to reform. Education Historian and expert Diane Ravitch has a better sense of things and doesn't mince words here on the subject.
Bad reform ideas seem more contagious than good ones.
No Child Left Behind and now Race to the Top pushed by our Education Secretary Arne Duncan fail to comprehend the complexity of what motivates all of us who teach. A uniform system of pay does indeed do little to motivate us yet we show up every day and good teachers have yet to beat down the local government or statehouse door calling for such a shift. We teach not to be rich but to make a difference. Fair pay and work conditions are far more important. It is exceedingly difficult to measure teacher effectiveness and
quality and designing a valid system is elusive so we settle for
something else. The only result of PfP is the further demoralization of teachers and more reliance and focus on standardized
exams which are debatable in terms of their measure of showing teacher quality. Something they were not designed to do. The United States is constantly compared to Finland where
they've focused instead on reduced class size, boosted teachers’ salaries, and eliminated most standardized testing. It would appear we are resolved to forge our own reform path come hell or high water. It is hard to turn the reform train around.
We could separate Merit Pay and Value Added(another topic we've covered pretty well) and they both amount to Pay for Performance. You can pay me for what I do, or, you can pay me for what my students do. The latter is a bad a idea and no sound example of the former truly exists. That does't change the fact that current compensation practices are inadequate and potentially outdated. I can only hope is the same will soon be true for Merit Pay. Most teachers simply ask they be paid what they are really worth something that is rarely the case.
In the meantime we plan on doing our best to "educate" our local representatives on the subject with the hope that Merit Pay might not progress far beyond consideration. We'd encourage you to voice whatever our your view is as well.
Things in Charlottesville are hopping. In a few short lines here is what is going in. We got new desks. After 3 years of trying new desks have arrived and we even got chairs, once we tracked them. There's a great deal more to the story but new desks are great and we are happy. Hopefully the students are as well.
In class we have hit our stride. We both agreed that after parent
conferences you settle into a little groove and the groups seem more
comfortable with you, as you are with them. The chaos of the start of the
year has dissipated and students are still energized. It is a great
time for learning and as the weather changes we just try to tap into that energy and help them learn.
Speaking of learning The Teaching Underground is now 2 years old. How'd we miss that? We turned two years old and we missed it. We feel bad. No cake, no candle, nothing. It was October 1st 2010 when we started this little venture and we have come a long way. But we are still "stuck" in the basement. Oh well there are far worse fates. Life goes on and so will we. Please don't hold it against us and please no gifts.
"The roof, the roof, the roof is on fire..."
The Cavalier Football team is 2-4 and their practice facility caught fire in what some are calling a metaphor for the season. We lost to Duke. Again! But have faith in Coach London. As a Cavalier fan, you must never be short on faith. Faith and patience. And take solace in the fact that Virginia Tech also lost which has helped us avoid the taunting of our government teaching basement colleague. Mr. Turner also got lucky and defeated my team in Fantasy football...barely. I blame Drew Brees and Marques Colston who each had about 10,000 points. But he might be wise to remember this: When you lose you should say little. When you win say even less. Karma is always watching
Not exactly connected to Karma but maybe to the same part of the world His Holiness the Dalai Llama is visiting Charlottesville this week. We extended a lunch invitation and we'll wait and see if he is able to accept. It was rather informal and if he can't make it we'll understand. Maybe he'll just catch up with a few of our past blog posts. The Dalai Llama is among the most admirable person in the world and those fortunate enough to have met him seem better for it. Given the chance for a private audience what would you speak to him about? Makes you wonder doesn't it. One thing for sure is that he seems to value education and on that we can all agree. Our hope is he has a wonderful visit. This is his third time he has graced our community, the first since 1989. One of my favorite quotes attributed to him is "Be kind whenever possible. It is always possible."
Busy as we are teaching and working with our current students we haven't had as much time to get our thoughts together for new blog material. But one unique thing about this time of the year is the reappearance of some former students as they have a brief break from college. I sat with one at the home football game on Friday and our conversation ranged from the Higgs Boson to cross country running and even the merits of marching band uniforms. Another student I saw this morning is enrolled at the Naval Academy at Annapolis. He was always a little ahead of his peers but when I first saw him this morning at the other end of the hall I thought "what is the admiral doing here?" He seemed more mature than I will ever be and certainly wise beyond his years. I also ran across another past student at the grocery store and he told me stories about his "crazy roommate". Normally these tales are rich with hyperbole but based on what described I think his roommate is actually crazy. Finally one sent me a kind note recalling a lesson from 8 years ago as she prepared to write a college anthropology paper. Really? Sometimes you just have to saw "wow."
I also came across this movie trailer which sort of makes you say "wow", in a completely different way.
That’s not German…It’s phonetic for a question more people should ask themselves. If you couldn't figure it out, you probably shouldn't be in charge.
What could we, the TU, know about Educational Leadership? Truth be told we know a thing or two. This post is an adaptation of a presentation the Underground was privileged enough to conduct with members of the student body while they attended a school leadership retreat. It is relevant because the void of true leadership from anyone in a high enough position to make a difference is starting to hurt. The only thing worse than no leadership is bad leadership. And that is exectly what the Feds and state legislatures have been giving us the past few years. In fact I am beginning to think the term Educational Leader is actually an oxymoron. As we grow accustomed to gridlock in DC, the only thing clear is we are lacking enough leaders willing or capable to lead us to a better place. This might also be true in education.
Above the building level what we need systemically is great leadership. Not common in a profession where upward mobility is rather non-existent. School divisions find leadership even harder to come by because promotion from the classroom is often an escape for some. Still others see the classroom as a necessary chore to enter educational leadership. It is increasingly easy to hop online and pick their Ed.L.D. with little or no teaching experience and whamo...they are making decisions for us all. It's not that outsiders shouldn't contribute but Corporate style leadership in education is not too popular with many people in education.
Many good teachers don't want to leave the kids thus restricting their influence. But they aren't too fond of seagulls either. New leadership hires usually come with a dizzying list of degrees but potentially absent the insights and experience most needed. When you look even higher, the void is so pronounced that few people in the upper echelons have any connection as to what is actually happening and what is actually needed on the student level. How frequent and in what context was the word education used in the recent Presidential debate? That says a lot about where education fits into the public consciousness. Is that an indictment of current education policy makers nationally…yeah…I guess it is. But they are not all purposefully disconnected. Some are victims of time and distance from the classroom.
Defining leadership is simple…defining good leadership…not as easy. Defining Good Educational Leadership even more so. In its most basic form leadership is the capacity or ability to lead. To lead is to either get in front to show people the way or to go along with them, maybe even push from behind. One thing that becomes immediately clear is those who are the leaders can’t always show the way directly.
Jobs within education are very different and quite stratified. So the "lead by Example" motto falls by the wayside. It's hard to provide the example when you have no experience in a specific area from which to draw. There are currently so many levels of leadership in what some call the bloated education bureaucracy.
We’ve said before that anyone referred to as an "educator" should be required to teach a class. Just to keep their feet on the ground and their heads out of their rumps. More importantly would be the fact that they would get to deal with kids each day. A leader takes an active role in making something happen with others. Teachers do this all the time. The “others” are referred to as followers, so I guess I am a leader and a follower(hey by the way are you an official follower of the TU…if not you can do so on the menu at the right). Kids are the constant in education and people who wall themselves off from that figuratively or literally impede their ability to lead effectively.
In reality leaders in education are not only outside of the classroom, they are in it. Principals, Superintendents, and School Board Members all play a key role in the chain of leadership and direction of policy. But the anchor points of that chain are the teachers and the parents. They are both the ones with the most understanding but also often the most disconnected the point of influence. This disconnect from leadership and students causes or results in an over-reliance on data and numbers.
Too often they operate with suspect understanding and a predetermined outcome devoid of feedback or empathy to those affected. They are too often asked to make decisions absent key information. Leading by mandate handed down from above alienates followers and often loses sight of the real needs of students.
The skills of leadership are elusive and fluid. They take practice. Some aspects of leadership can be learned and developed and this makes perfect sense. What is often missing in educational leaders is that they work with people that don't see they have to earn the position. That relationship has grown even more complicated as education has become politicized. The educational, economic and political considerations now seem to overshadow an individual’s ability to make a difference. That is after all what good or bad leadership eventually does…make a difference.
Give some thought to a several important questions. What is the Goal of Educational Leadership? A better way to think about this might be to ask what do good educational leaders do? Think about their impact, their influence on other people, how they spend their time. Why they became a leader in the first place?
A brief answer would be good leaders make things better. They make it easier and better for kids, teachers, parents…everyone. Educational leadership should improve our schools thus ultimately the future for our kids. Such positions should not and cannot be used for personal advancement, promotion or for any other reason but to make things better. While at the top level this may show as pushing hard for a change to gain a desired national outcome to put a feather in the cap, at my level it would be empowering people to create, develop and improve things all the while forging relationships that move us all forward. That isn't a lot to ask is it?
We may write a bit more on this topic but in the meantime take a few moments to view this video and see if you can think of how it might apply to educational leadership.
It is actually a stupid question. Most say it is Michael Jordan. But there are a number of ways to determine the best basketball player of all time. For some it depends on which number you look at. Where a player ranks in terms of a particular statistical category is the usual measure. Scoring, rebounding, assists, simple wins and losses, game winning shots or even number of championship rings. Some move past this and direct focus on who could change a game or wanted the ball in their hands at the end of the game.
Kobe, James, Jordan, Russell, Chamberlain and many others enter the conversation at various points. Experts weigh whether it is even fair to judge players from different eras against each other. The game changed. For that matter whether it is even fair to compare players who play different positions as their roles are different. Guards, centers all perform different jobs. If a guard leads your team in rebounding, you've probably got issues.
Student and even teacher excuses can be more plentiful
Personally while I love college basketball, I've never really enjoyed the NBA and get a bit more into the NFL. With the advent of Fantasy Football these conversations have taken on a new dimension. Fantasy teams mean players are valued not for talent, heart or value to the team... but for how they stack up on the tally sheet. Numbers can mislead you and as you stare at charts of player data. Participants in fantasy leagues neglect the big picture and only look at stats. Yards, points per game, supersede all else in a data driven world. They can make you think a player is good when they are not and vice versa. Like many the Underground has found enjoyment in this diversion. We have become especially fond of pointing out the ineptitude of other basement member's fantasy squads. This is a big week as we play each other. No worries, I've got him covered. Not sure that's true but what is for certain is that fantasy sports have changed the way we watch the game and how we find enjoyment in sports. The argument is less about who is the best and more about who had the best fantasy day. Let's jump from athletics to education.
As you are likely aware there are significant efforts to place a metric on the effectiveness of teachers. The "game" has changed. We worry less about who can teach and instead who has the best scores. Politicians and reforms are using the obvious impact of teachers have on student performance as a reason to try and rate them using data. Unable to affect change with what studies say is among the biggest factor, poverty ,they then go to teacher quality by default. Out of their mouths flow phrases like "every child deserves to have great teachers" and that turns into some bastardized form of accountability. The next step is to make some metric the measure of whether or not a teacher is effective. Too often this is connected to some sort of test. Having a score or number then somehow legitimizes your ability and skill as a teacher. It quantifies your impact. For me and the rest of Virginia's teachers, forty percent of my evaluation as a professional is taken from student growth. I am fortunate it is not directly tied to a statewide test score as this approach seems to be incentivized by Race to the Top Funds,.... yet. It is that way now. But I foresee the day when that is not something I will be able to say. While I've been wrong before concrete numbers matter.
To date, I have created my student goals and begun to plan on how to implement them but I am still not quite certain what or how I will use this to show growth without being too subjective. I am choosing one measure of student growth related to our lifelong learner standards and their ability to write. But because I grade this work it is invariably subjective. Which leads us to the more objective method. Standardized tests. Sparing readers the indignity of why they are flawed as a true measure and far from ideal when it comes to telling whether or not someone can teach, I'll just say they are as misleading as fantasy points. In fantasy football a player's team can build a big lead and that could actually hurt their point total. Teachers are the most significant in-school piece to student learning
and success but they are not the only piece and there is much out of and in
school that plays a role. There's the motivational of students, desire to learn, attendance, class size, social incentives, socio-economic level, and school size all of which top a list that researchers constantly study and debate.
These guys have taught me a lot
Teachers matter. I know they matter a lot. But other things matter too. To attempt to objectively measure why one teacher might be better than another has the potential to prove as fruitful as an argument about who is the best NBA or NFL player. And conceivably more pointless. How much authentic learning goes unappreciated or is even replaced with narrow result oriented instruction? The end result of this effort and energy does little to help me improve as a teacher and frankly I feel less supported. Am I more inclined to narrow my approach to serve my goal(s)? I hope not. But the best way to measure me as a teacher is to be in the room with me while I teach. Not once, but a lot. Still... improving teachers and learning by measures such as this is just that, a fantasy. Thus it does little to improve the quality of education for students. Maybe we should instead focus our attention on working to support all teachers and devote resources in their service, not to figuring out who is the "best".
