tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4526659937118816707.post7878009410126229553..comments2023-10-31T10:36:24.845-05:00Comments on K12 Reformer - Mike Reno: Financially reward those teachers who truly make a difference!Mike Renohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02321695059501190325noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4526659937118816707.post-76194959406148512452008-02-24T20:50:00.000-05:002008-02-24T20:50:00.000-05:00Mike,The MEA will never agree to merit pay - yet t...Mike,<BR/><BR/>The MEA will never agree to merit pay - yet they seem to embrace the concept at their management level. Take a look at what I've uncovered about the MEA: http://roblawrence.blogspot.com/2008/02/rich-get-richer-in-mea.html<BR/><BR/>Drop me an email and I'll get you the raw data.Rob Lawrencehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07078551548669786649noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4526659937118816707.post-80916476048901187622008-02-22T11:51:00.000-05:002008-02-22T11:51:00.000-05:00While I understand the lobbying concerns (which is...While I understand the lobbying concerns (which is an issue for both parties, btw), there's a lot of money that could be funneled into the schools if we "just took":<BR/><BR/>--ALL the Lotto money (you know, the original promise)<BR/>--the money currently being spent in Iraq <BR/><BR/>etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc.<BR/><BR/>In other words, I'm sympathetic to the notion that money could be channeled from other pies into the schools. Agreed. But the reality is at the end of the day you're most likely going to have to sign onto tax hikes and increased spending to make a merit system go. <BR/><BR/>I think the article--and reality--clearly suggest that.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4526659937118816707.post-29379964760866623752008-02-21T11:29:00.000-05:002008-02-21T11:29:00.000-05:00Mike, I think you're being too generous. Meaningf...Mike, I think you're being too generous. Meaningful reforms would enable merit pay without raising taxes one red cent. <BR/><BR/>Note the MCFN report that shows the State spending $1,500,000 last year lobbying ITSELF.<BR/><BR/>Just take that million and a half and invest it in a trial-run merit pay system and you could do untold good. And that'd be as a result of a relatively miniscule reform.<BR/><BR/>--Nick<BR/>www.RightMichigan.comRightMichigan.comhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09225711215771842548noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4526659937118816707.post-85025579890777546742008-02-21T09:50:00.000-05:002008-02-21T09:50:00.000-05:00Thank you for raising your thoughtful and serious ...Thank you for raising your thoughtful and serious questions, Anonymous. Very good post.<BR/> <BR/>A significant underlying reason that many -- including me -- have opposed tax increases has been the complete absence of any reform that will reduce the chances that they'll only be raised again.<BR/> <BR/>It's really akin to a parent who continues to bail out their adult children, without expecting them to change their bad habits. In this case taxpayers are the adults, and the state is the child with the bad habits.<BR/> <BR/>And while you are correct in saying that much of the recent message in Michigan has indeed been that "schools must do more with less, cut cut cut, etc", I think that is perhaps a separate discussion, and speaks more to the bad spending habits of schools than it does to merit pay.<BR/> <BR/>I’ve heard no talk of cuts in teacher pay, and any talk of benefit “cuts” is a matter of perspective. Pay increases have been limited, but that has been largely driven by this puzzling approach of trading benefits for wages.<BR/> <BR/>The teacher pay system is an odd duck. This "step system" starts them with a moderate to low salary, and then increases approximately 10% per year for the first ten years. After ten years, they get a pathetic 1% - 2% per year increase, essentially moving them backwards after considering inflation. There might be some "longevity" bonus that begins after 15 years. It has nothing to do with their teaching skills, proficiency, results, etc.<BR/> <BR/>Plus, it's a formula that is not sustainable. For example, if half of the staff is still on the steps (less than 10 years) and half is top of scale (more than 10 years), then the blended increase in the total payroll is at least 4.5%, which is much greater than inflation.<BR/><BR/>Despite the fact that this is unaffordable, I've heard no talk of cutting teacher pay. I wouldn't support a cut, by the way, but I wholeheartedly support exploring a more reasonable system (which would include, incidentally, reimbursement for the education they’re required to take and currently must pay for themselves).<BR/> <BR/>As far as the benefits go, I've got dozens of articles on this blog that show how the costs are out-of-control. There are reasonable changes that could be made to copays, deductibles, coinsurance, and prescription formulary plans, etc, which could help to control the cost of insurance. They're the same plans that all of us in the private sector are living with now, so we wouldn't be blazing any trails there. Note that even if those things are done, the cost of healthcare will still continue to increase. So the school would still face increased costs each year, but not as much. Employees would begin to share in those costs. I'm sure someone will twist that into being viewed as a cut! :-)<BR/> <BR/>These things – the compensation system (including merit pay) and healthcare – represent 85% (or more) of the cost of education. I think everyone -- especially me -- would be delighted to see the MEA become part of the solution. But the only thing I’ve really seen from them is a call for increased taxes, but without any structural change. That’s really a non-starter.<BR/> <BR/>The article is correct; the unions need to buy into any plans. But in Florida, they vehemently opposed the concept of merit pay, and refused to help design the plans at the local level. Hardly seems constructive to me. And while Denver's was more accepted, it took seven years to develop! We won World War II in four years!<BR/> <BR/>I think a move to merit pay, coupled with other meaningful reforms, would make a compelling case for looking at tax increases, or perhaps a more stable funding source. But without reforms, you're howling at the moon!Mike Renohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02321695059501190325noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4526659937118816707.post-42072699078675561342008-02-20T23:09:00.000-05:002008-02-20T23:09:00.000-05:00"There's little research on what makes for a succe..."There's little research on what makes for a successful merit-pay system, but several factors seem critical, says Matthew Springer, director of the National Center on Performance Incentives at Vanderbilt University. Denver's program includes many of them: a careful effort to earn teacher buy-in to the plan, clarity about how it works, multiple ways of measuring merit, rewards for teamwork and schoolwide success, and reliable financing. In fact, Denver's voters agreed to pay an extra $25 million a year in taxes for nine years to support the program."<BR/><BR/><BR/>I truly wonder if those in Michigan who now rail against increased taxes and point out at every opportunity how much teachers cost the state in both wages and benefits would, or could, suddenly shift gears and embrace tax increases and increases in spending to implement a merit system? It's a serious question. <BR/><BR/>For example, when Romney was still in the race, he was asked about teacher salaries here in Michigan and he responded, essentially, that raises didn't need to be given wholesale--just to those based on merit (I'm paraphrasing).<BR/><BR/>The implication has always been in the stories I've read in Michigan media, this TIME article aside, that districts need to do more with less and cut, cut, cut. That goes for teachers salaries. That goes for teacher benefits. All of it. <BR/><BR/>A second implication tied into that thesis is that there is a participant (MEA) currently involved in the process whose presence and voice is detrimental to everyone.<BR/><BR/>Yet this TIME article clearly states two things: 1) a merit system costs $$$ and requires sacrifice (re: taxes and spending) 2) a merit system (at least a successful one) requires the participation of teachers AND teacher unions in constructing and implementing such a system. No teacher/union buy in=not going to work. That seems to be very clear. <BR/><BR/>But both of the above items seem to be at odds with the rhetoric I've been reading from people and groups interested in the term known as "reform."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4526659937118816707.post-65439571679642213342008-02-20T14:47:00.000-05:002008-02-20T14:47:00.000-05:00"It's hard to argue against the notion of rewardin..."It's hard to argue against the notion of rewarding the best teachers for doing a good job. But merit pay has a long, checkered history in the U.S., and new programs to pay teachers according to test scores have already backfired in Florida and Houston."<BR/><BR/>I should have written "Florida" instead of "Denver."<BR/><BR/>The EAG comments are relevant. You're quoted prominently in both press release articles of the MSBLF, the child of the EAG. <BR/><BR/>That said, delete my posts if you deem appropriate. But my views stand: you and whomever else are going to have to view the MEA and teachers as equal partners in any "reform" you have in mind. It's not going to be dictated.<BR/><BR/>Again, reality.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4526659937118816707.post-5741824298093974712008-02-20T14:11:00.000-05:002008-02-20T14:11:00.000-05:00Bill:Starting a blog is free at Google, and I'd en...Bill:<BR/><BR/>Starting a blog is free at Google, and I'd encourage you to do that if you want to repeatedly make unnecessary disparaging comments about EAG and Kyle. Your second comment here is fine, but some of what you wrote in your first is unacceptable. Those "anti-teacher" labels you freely toss out at anyone who doesn't agree with your perspective on unions are WAY out of line, and I'm not going to allow them here.<BR/><BR/>I have no problem allowing critical comments, but these and other comments are 100% untrue, absolutely unrelated to the topics, and are too personal in nature. I’m sorry if you don’t like EAG’s “Thug Watch”, and other stuff, but this is not the place for you to carry on your fight with them. In the future, I'm just going to delete them.<BR/><BR/>Now, to the issue, I'm not sure what your concern is with Denver:<BR/><BR/><I>“In Denver, for example, Professional Compensation, or ProComp, is the product of a seven-year collaboration among the teachers' union, the district and city hall. Rolled out last school year, ProComp includes nine ways for teachers to raise their earnings, some through bonuses and some through bumps in salary. New hires are automatically enrolled, while veterans have the option of sticking with the old salary schedule. But in just one year, half of Denver's 4,555 teachers have signed on.” </I><BR/><BR/>As far as Houston goes, the only mistake cited was, <I>“In Houston, a newspaper website identified which teachers got bonuses. Later, 99 employees were asked to return about $74,000 in bonus checks issued by mistake.”</I><BR/><BR/>The article says, <I>“Both Florida and Houston have improved their programs, but local teachers remain wary.”</I> That speaks to what I pointed out above, which is that plans aren’t perfect and will need adjustments. <BR/><BR/>Beyond that, it sounds like it’s a philosophical disagreement with the union over some of the aspects of their particular merit pay system, such as having a limited pool of money available that essentially requires some competition.Mike Renohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02321695059501190325noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4526659937118816707.post-73444771443808934772008-02-20T14:02:00.000-05:002008-02-20T14:02:00.000-05:00...in other words, any advocate of this "reform" i......in other words, any advocate of this "reform" is going to have to learn how to play nice and be respectful of teachers and their unions. They will be equal partners in such a discussion and their buy-in and participation in the process is necessary. <BR/><BR/>I know that grinds certain people and I know they'll howl and stamp their feet and say "no way!" But it's reality. <BR/><BR/>Until there is an acceptance of the MEA and they're viewed as a partner in the process, "reformers" and others like Kyle, like you Mike, whomever, are wasting your time. <BR/><BR/>Reality.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4526659937118816707.post-54795295233574516662008-02-20T13:23:00.000-05:002008-02-20T13:23:00.000-05:00The article also clearly stated that there's one t...The article also clearly stated that there's one thing very necessary if one has any hope of making something like this work: teacher buy in. <BR/><BR/>Unfortunately, I haven't yet seen anyone in the EAG/anti-teacher crowd around here suggest anything like that--only that teachers have it too good and the world would be a better place if rules and regulations were simply foisted onto them and they didn't have any rights to do pesky things like protest or peacebly assemble.<BR/><BR/>The article also points out the dismal failure of such systems in Houston and Denver. <BR/><BR/>Like anything, talk about it. But again: any talk of such things has to include respect for all parties and include all parties, including teachers. <BR/><BR/>Some of the most fervent supporters of such things either never set foot in the classroom as a teacher or bailed because they couldn't hack it. But they run Internet blogs and send off press releases to the media and certainly have a wealth of knowledge about the subject. <BR/><BR/>Personally, I think board members should have to spend a few days each year in the classroom as substitute teachers--junior high school would be perfect. <BR/><BR/>That and respect teachers and make them partners in this "reform" process instead of trying to crush them into the dust with some sort of iron fist.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4526659937118816707.post-70841286388412244882008-02-20T12:48:00.000-05:002008-02-20T12:48:00.000-05:00"Why do teachers bail? One of the biggest reasons ..."Why do teachers bail? One of the biggest reasons is pay. U.S. public-school teachers earn an average annual salary of less than $48,000, and they start off at an average of about $32,000. That's what Karie Gladis, 29, earned as a new teacher in Miami. She scrimped for 31⁄2 years and then left for a job in educational publishing. "It was stressful living from paycheck to paycheck," she says. "If my car broke down or if I needed dental work, there was just no wiggle room."<BR/><BR/>Averages are meaningless because so many leave so quickly.<BR/><BR/>For comparision, in Rochester, the starting pay is a bit over $37K with a Bachelors. A teacher with ten years and a Masters earns over $83K per year.<BR/><BR/>PLEASE, no teacher bashing. There are many that earn every penney.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com