By Jaime Hudgins
The teacher salary debate hit the blogosphere this fall when the American Enterprise Institute and the Heritage Foundation released a report arguing that teachers are overpaid. Last week, the conversation popped up again in the New York Times' Room for Debate feature, which included commentaries from the report's authors, Jason Richwine and Andrew Biggs, as well as other education scholars. But there's one perspective conspicuously missing from the teacher salary discussion: a teacher's. How do we feel about how we're compensated? In what direction would we like to see this conversation move?
In their original report, Richwine and Biggs argue that when health and retirement benefits, holiday time, and job security are taken into account, teachers are overcompensated compared to our peers in the private sector (to determine comparable peers, Richwine and Biggs used scores on standardized tests such as the SAT). The report caused quite a buzz, and as a teacher myself, I believe I speak for many of my colleagues in appreciating that Richwine and Biggs have drawn attention to the question of teacher compensation. Now that the subject is on the table, we would love to engage in the long overdue discussion of real compensation reform -- reform that can reward excellence in teaching and bring more top talent to America's classrooms.
For far too many individuals, teaching is perceived as one of the cushiest jobs around -- days that end at 3:00, long holiday breaks and a nine-month work year with decent pay and great benefits. Given this misperception, as well as the mediocre performance of a large number of America's public schools, it is understandable that teacher compensation has become the subject of scrutiny. The conversation over at Room for Debate highlights a valid critique of education: that unlike fields like finance, engineering and medicine, education does not tend to attract -- and retain -- the top tier of college graduates. As a teacher, I'm interested in shifting the conversation from whether we're paid too little or too much towards how we can make education more enticing to high performers, both in our early careers and, perhaps more importantly, as we progress.
Like many of my peers at the highly-regarded university from which I graduated, I initially made a decision to enter the private sector. Many of us did not consider teaching at anything below a collegiate level a respectable or profitable career option. Part of this attitude, I believe, stems from the way teacher salaries are determined. Most public school teachers are paid like factory employees -- strictly based on their seniority level and educational attainment -- on a pay scale that doesn't take performance into account.
In Memphis, where I teach, a fresh-faced 22-year-old with a bachelor's degree can become a teacher and earn a very healthy starting salary of $41,310. This sounds great until you look at the graded pay scale and learn that if that teacher stays in the classroom for 18 years, she will earn a maximum salary of $58,065, regardless of the quality of her efforts. Advanced degrees (which research shows have little impact on student achievement) bump these amounts minimally. Why would a high-achieving young adult want to enter a career where hard work and high performance -- those very things that "strivers" value so highly -- are devalued by a rigid compensation system in which their lifetime earning potential is exactly the same as a colleague who does the bare minimum? Why would these young professionals want to be active participants in a field that puts no value on doing your best? The problem with teacher salaries in the United States has less to do with overall compensation than with the more nuanced question of how that compensation is determined.
Richwine and Biggs hint at performance pay in their Room for Debate commentary, and another commentator, Lisa Snell from the Reason Foundation, points out that the National Education Association, the nation's largest teachers union, "calls for differentiating teacher compensation based on teacher effectiveness, the roles that teachers play, the difficulty of teaching assignments, and the length of the school year or school day." Of course, the development of criteria for determining which educators are deemed "effective," and which are best suited for leadership roles, is complicated. There is no single definition of what is, or makes, a great teacher.
Critics have been quick to assert that performance-based pay doesn't work in education -- and that is true, if your only measure of performance is student test scores. Nonetheless, as in any other profession, there are other skills that are largely intangible and unquantifiable, but are undeniably evident to students, colleagues and administrators, and should be a part of any performance-based system. A new report by the Measures of Effective Teaching project urges districts and states to combine several measures of teacher performance, including frequent observations of teachers, student surveys, and measures of student achievement to create a robust picture of a teacher's effectiveness (indeed: the study found that a combination of scores on observations, student feedback and student achievement gains were better predictors of a teacher's success with students than graduate degrees or years of experience -- the traditional means by which teacher pay is increased).
To be effective, any system that seeks to reward educators based on performance must be clear and fair to teachers, use multiple measures to determine teacher effectiveness, and be linked to student outcomes. Such a system should improve student outcomes. It should also lead to that additional perk that "strivers" seek: a sense of pride in what they have accomplished.
Richwine and Biggs have correctly identified that there is a problem in our nation's compensation system for educators; however, the problem is not that teachers are overpaid. Such an argument is insulting to teachers and misguided. Instead, the problem is that our current system does a poor job of rewarding those actions and qualities that make our best teachers great. In doing so, we are missing an opportunity to get even more great talent into America's classrooms -- and to keep it there.
Jaime Siebrase Hudgins is currently in her fifth year of teaching at Raleigh Egypt High School in Memphis, where she teaches US government, AP US government, economics, and world history. She is a Teach Plus Teaching Policy Fellow.
Follow Teach Plus on Twitter: www.twitter.com/teachplus
Are Teachers Overpaid? A Response to Critics
Critical Issues in Assessing Teacher Compensation
Daugaard: Overhaul how we pay teachers in South Dakota
AISD discusses teacher pay raises
Two new studies add fuel to debate over teacher compensation (Julie Mack blog)
Great teachers work hard and need to be compensated based on their greatness. We all know that there are teachers who are just in it to get a check. However, that's why the teacher compensation system needs to be overhauled. Base my pay on the great work I do.
And why do people get all upset that teachers get the summers and holidays off! We need that time to rest, reflect and re-group. Anyone who feels that teachers shouldn't get that much time, please spend one day in classroom teaching children and I promise you will change your opinions!
The key word is REWARD. We all know that their are many teachers who go to work just to collect a paycheck. However I am not one of them. I work hard, I want my kids to learn, and they make gains in my classroom every year. Shouldn't I be rewarded for that. OF COURSE I SHOULD! ALL GREAT TEACHER SHOULD!
Let's face it...no one is getting rich teaching in public schools. "Overpaid" is absurd.
All we're hearing here is a paid mouthpiece for Bill Gates.
It's too bad that by simply regurgitating the talking points of any number of "reform" groups this teacher has proven that some teachers are incapable of the critical thought that we ask of our students.
Are evaluations to be a popularity contest? Often the teacher that is not popular is the most effective. They're not popular because they demand hard work and get it. And those students learn whether they like it or not.
I can see a class of 8th graders secretly banding together in a vendetta against a teacher they don't like resulting in a poor evaluation. How do I know? I once had a class tell the principal I had daily bible readings in class. Why? Because they loved their previous teacher and thought he left because I got him fired and took his job. That's how 8th graders think and act. I was lucky I had a parent volunteer working in the classroom every day to testify to the principal that it was all lies.
I will never agree to student evaluations. Ever.
Scientific evidence has proven that the frontal cortex, the part of the brain that governs emotions and rational thought, is severly compromised during the onset of puberty well untill their late teens.
I love my students and I do value their feedback, but student evaluations are not reasonable.
I receive no compensation or acknowledgment for that accomplishment. It doesn't weigh on my salary or for any job transfer opportunities.
Teaching should not be a popularity contest. National Board Certification is an unbiased review and evaluation process. Student and principal surveys are not. Principals love the teachers that sit down, shut up and don't rock the boat. Those are often the worst. They hate teachers that speak up and fight for their students. They are often the best. Students love the easy teachers and hate those that challenge then and make them work.
How about teachers with National Board Certification be compensated more than their colleagues? That will certainly point out who's not making the cut as National Board Certification isn't easy.
As an educator, I decided that I wanted to develop into a great teacher. Therefore, I engaged in the National Board process and I became a National Board Teacher. I am paid 10,000 additional dollars each year in the city of Memphis as a National Board Certified Teacher. Then I received advanced degrees in order to get another increase in salary. I feel that my salary is suitable, but I had to work hard as an educator to get compensated. However, it takes many hours afterschool planning for my students and giving additional hours to projects for the students such as: plays,tutoring, talent shows. I am not compensated for those hours. Needless to say, I do it because I love my students and I want them to excel. Therefore, this article is needed for the district, state, and federal government to come together collectively to revamp how to solict effective teachers through pay for the work that they put in to motivate and uplift our students which is sometimes given outside the classroom walls.
One factor that shouldn't be glossed over IS the vacation time. Now I know... teachers will say, "We do professional development" this and that during our summer... etc. But that's rhetoric. The bottom line is that they have 10 weeks off from work--and that really is a tremendous perk! Not many jobs offer this "benefit", and that should be weighed into the equation.
Yes, I know UPS drivers who earn more than most teachers. But UPS drivers don't receive this large chunk of time off (though they do get a lot of time off). It effectively bumps the "pay" of teachers up, to have this block of time off. Don't discount that.
Or do you want what amounts to a minimum wage factory worker instructing your child.
You get what you pay for. $45,000 a year without benefits or pension will get you the teaching equivalent of the cashier at WalMart. Is that what you want? Because they won't compete in the world market.
You don't like that summer off? (When teachers are taking those masters classes?)
Fine. No more summer. Students will go to school an additional ten weeks during the summer. (Be prepared to pay for air conditioning of all public schools.) In fact, lets cut out the Easter and Summer breaks too. Give children a taste of the adult working world from day one. They get only the normal holidays. Say the holidays that the postal workers get. How's that?
Oh, and no more Mommy and Daddy pulling baby out of school any time they want for that trip to Hawaii. I don't get to go to Hawaii. The cashier at Walmart doesn't get two weeks off to go to Hawaii. So your little darling will show up to school every day. If they're sick, fine. But better call it in in advance and no more than three days in a row. Unexcused absences will be billed to the parent for lost ADA.
I kinda like that.
The fact that I'm having to explain this to someone like you shows the ignorance in your PoV. You probably don't even make the connection between tax dollars, and what pays your (teaching) salary.
This country no longer respects teachers are professionals. That has be done in order to justify lowering their pay. And now attacking their benefits and pensions. Education has been politicized as a pawn in the push to destroy unions in this country.
If I were in college now, making a career choice, I would NOT choose teaching. I advise all young people I meet to consider a different profession as I only see things getting worse.
I've been saying this for years, Ramon. So true. There are many good teachers in classrooms today, and many marginal ones. That's why we need to bring selectivity in who we employ/not employ. It doesn't take the elaborate measures and controversy in rating teachers. Get bakc to COMMON SENSE! We have plenty of young teachers dying for their opportunity.