Gov. Robert F. McDonnell on Tuesday unveiled a program that would award $3 million in merit-based bonuses to recruit and retain teachers in select schools in Northern Virginia and elsewhere in the state.

But the experiment in merit pay prompted concern in some school districts. Officials in Fairfax and Loudoun counties said they probably would reject the money even though McDonnell (R) was offering it at a time of strained budgets.

The resistance highlights how controversial merit pay remains in public education, despite the support of the Obama administration and some other school reform advocates. Schools in Prince George’s County and the District have programs that tie teacher pay, at least some instances, to evaluations of performance. But teachers’ unions often oppose such plans.

McDonnell named 169 eligible schools, including about 50 in Northern Virginia, that he said have been difficult to keep staffed. Nine of those schools are in Fairfax County, but the district’s own experiment with merit pay in the 1980s did not go well, said Superintendent Jack D. Dale.,

Since we have an elected SB (with political agendas), it makes sense to base teacher's pay on performance. The problem will be establishing and measuring performance criteria.
The caliber of teachers (who are leaving) are nothing like PG and DC school system's teachers. That's a weak, political argument from Jack Dale.

I worked under Pay for Performance for many years and it worked out fine.
The strongest opposition came from people who were already aware of their
poor attendance records and overall performance anyway. Since it was a
Federal agency many of them were accustomed to gaming the system by hiding behind
their minority status and were terrified that a performance based pay system
would require them to shape up or ship out. It took nearly two years for all
of it to soak in once implemented but they got the message. Some just left
out of fear of the unknown and others were phased out the door but since
everything was well documented they could kick and scream all they wanted
but the evidence was too strong. Some actually shaped up. I laughed my ass off.

Im not sure how merit pay works. Teachers get raises depending on how their students do? Wouldnt teachers just hand out A's or majorly curve everything to improve performance of the students? And frankly, theyre doing that already. Did you know many schools dont even give zeros anymore? They start at 50%. 50% IS a zero in many schools. How does that make sense? A kid who doesnt hand in a project can get a 50% while a kid who does a poorly done project can get the same grade. And on top of that, they are able to keep redoing it until their grade on the project improves. Believe it or not, many schools in our county are operating under rules like this. Just to please whining parents and appease the state so grades look good.

When are they going to learn that it starts at HOME. Kids who get support at home generally do well. Kids who live in homes where either parents arent home, or where the parents dont care what their child does, usually struggle. Yet parents and the government want to keep blaming teachers.

Oh and about McDonell - doesnt he not believe in Evolution? MAybe he needs to go back to school.

In theory, merit pay for teachers sounds good. Good implementation is very difficult, though. I've seen excellent teachers and counselors harassed out of a school because the principal or another administrator doesn't like them. I've also seen mediocre teachers and counselors get special perks and public praise from FCPS administrators. It depends on the principals and other administrators who do the evaluations, and what they value.

I read a while back somewhere--sorry not to give the right credit, but I don't remember- that you will seldom find a bad teacher in a school with an excellent principal. You will find some good teachers in schools with bad principals. As a former teacher, I believe this to be true.

A bad principal is one who is afraid of firing a good teacher, doesn't know how to help a struggling teacher, and seldom goes in a classroom because s/he has "too much to do" or "too many meetings". When a school has a principal like this h/she doesn't know a teacher might spend the last half hour of school filing her nails-or in today's world, on the phone or computer.

I understand that my neighborhood school now has a great principal, but, when my children were there we had one principal who was far more concerned about getting points with Domenech, and then another who just wanted to be principal for the prestige. She really didn't have a clue. She didn't need the money.

A good principal puts the education of the children first. He/She listens to the teachers and the parents. He never demeans his teachers in front of parents but he does not question the parent's point of view. Again, the education and well being of the students should come first.

Until FCPS gets strong principals in all schools, merit pay for teachers will not work. There are too many variables in standardized scores--including the possibility of fraud.

After watching our superintendent at school board meetings, I question whether he would know a good principal when he sees one. Any School Board that puts an admin building over maintenance, repair and construction of school buildings is seriously misguided.

Testing students was supposed to get around the grade inflation. If you can somehow objectively prove certain teachers within a school are performing better than others, you can pay them more, replace some of the weak teachers, allow class sizes to rise, and make the schools more cost-efficient. Ths wouldn't go over well with the teachers unions, PTAs, or administrators who see the student-teacher ratio as a key metric.

It's a BS idea that fails every time it's attempted. It was also tried before the 1980's, and it failed then as well. It all involves kissing ass for a pay increase and nothing more.

Btw, do you conveniently notice which districts currently have it? Yeah, D.C. and PG Co. are such shining examples of great school systems.

==================================================================================================
"And if any women or children get their legs torn off, or faces caved in, well, it's tough shit for them." -2LT. Bert Stiles, 505th, 339th (On Berlin Bombardier Mission, 1944).

Too many variables in testing:

1. Fraud--especially with poor teachers. If they test their own students, they will try to make them look good--if they test other teacher's students.......you finish the sentence.
2. Truancy can affect performance--if one teacher gets kids that don't come to school, they are not likely to perform well.
3. How are students assigned to classes? If principal has the say so then students assigned to the teachers that are friendly with the principal are likely to get better performing students. If principal honors parent requests, then the parents that bother to request will usually choose a known good teacher over a new teacher. The new teacher might be good, but get all the low performing students--it happens, believe me.
4. In poor schools, it is likely that there is more transferring in and out--harder to test.
5. According to IQ theory, the students that are above average should make MORE than a year's progress in one year. The students below average likely will not. So, are you going to put that in the mix? Think about it, if you have one hand tied behind your back, are you going to run as fast? Every one can improve their speed--but some will never be as fast as others. Same with school.

I agree with the theory of merit pay--but relying on testing is not the answer. It is just too difficult. There are way too many variables.

Paying teachers based on performance is the only way to go.

I would assume it is linked to standardized tests that the teacher has little to no ability to falsify, and would involve proof of improvement, not necessarily meeting grade-level expectations. But then we wind up with teachers "teaching to the test," which is not ideal, but if it gets kids to learn the basics who cares? Of course the question is if they are "learning" or "memorizing" then.

And of course teachers can't control things like student attendance and home life. But, something needs to be done to improve public education and merit pay may be something to consider. Personally, I think a revamping of the entire system is in order, starting with an end to summer breaks.

Johnny Walker said:

"I would assume it is linked to standardized tests that the teacher has little to no ability to falsify, and would involve proof of improvement, not necessarily meeting grade-level expectations. But then we wind up with teachers "teaching to the test," which is not ideal, but if it gets kids to learn the basics who cares? Of course the question is if they are "learning" or "memorizing" then."

Johnny-Who do you think gives these tests? THE TEACHERS!
There are all sorts of ways to cheat on these. Did you not read WAPO about the fraud in the district tests? Erasures all over the sheets?

Not only that, when a person gives the tests, there are all sorts of opportunities to help the students. Perhaps, it might involve giving extra time--that can skew the results. The teacher reads the instructions. Sometimes the questions are read by the teachers (particularly in the younger grades.) Believe me, this can have a great impact on the results. I've known teachers who did not understand that little things can make a difference. I've known teachers who cheated for ego's sake--what do you think they would do when pay is involved?

Also, how many different tests do you think there are? Most standardized tests have very similar questions every year. Teachers will teach to the test. This is already happening with the SOL's. That brings up another issue--does the test really measure progress? That depends totally on how the test is designed and what the goals are.

I remember when my child was in elementary school. On the SOL's, she kept getting low scores on "pre-writing" and perfect scores on all the other parts of writing. When I asked her why, she said "Oh, they wanted us to do that 'mind mapping'--I just couldn't be bothered with that." She was a child who thought her writing out in her brain--not on paper. She ended up winning awards for her writing in high school-including one major award. She did poorly on pre-writing merely because she was stubborn.

When I taught school, I loved standardized tests because they helped me see where I needed to improve. When given at the beginning of the year, they also helped to alert me to students who needed extra help-but more important, they alerted me to exceptional students who were flying under my radar. I think I would have done just fine had I been measured in this way--but I know teachers who did cheat. How do I know this? because the next year the students could not read on the level the teacher had said they could. Few teachers did this, but I remember one teacher who transferred after getting a glowing recommendation from the principal as a result of the test scores. The next year we realized that the results were far from what she had presented. She had come from New York where they had the Regent's Tests(?). She knew how to cheat.

Standardized testing does have a place and a value--but not on teacher pay and probably not as a measure for how a school is doing. It should be used by the school and the teacher to help the students--not to fire the teacher.

I've said before, good principals have good teachers in their schools. We need to start there.

By the way--I have been opposed to teachers' unions for many years. The people that benefit most from the teachers' unions are the people running them. At one time I worked under a contract where the principal could not evaluate me unless he made an appointment to observe my class. (He could walk in my classroom at any time, but could not evaluate me on what he saw unless it was scheduled.) A principal should be able to make evaluations on anything he sees. (However, I am opposed to an evaluation based on only one observation. There should be at LEAST four.

I thought the way those tests are given (the SOLs, since those are the ones I took as a kid) is so structured that teachers didn't have a chance to mess with them, but I guess I was wrong. No, I hadn't heard of accusations of teachers cheating on those.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/20/2011 03:53PM by Johnny Walker.

I don't believe most teachers cheat. But, you have to face the reality that when your job is on the line, things can happen. Also, some people don't realize that even little adjustments can skew the results and give an unfair advantage.

Get real....you don't think the schools talk to each other and tell them what is on the test???...

You a fool.

I remember last year when my daughter was in 6th grade the History SOL had a few questions were on Reconstruction which was not supposed to be on the test.

All the teachers were whining about how unfair these questions were. I bet they were blowing up the phone to Gatehouse and other schools about the test questions.

ALL kids in FCPS should take the SOL on the same day.

When I took the teacher's test in another state, they gave half of us one portion in the a.m. and the other in the p.m. and vice versa. We were talking at lunch and one of the teachers mentioned one of the questions that she didn't know the answer to. I was stunned when I saw the question on my test that p.m. I did happen to know the answer but I felt guilty answering it.

We never dreamed they were giving the same test in the a.m. and the p.m. In college, they taught us that that was a "no-no".

Why do you think they are so careful with the AP tests--they don't let the teachers who teach those classes near the tests. They are not even supposed to ask the students later what was on the test. However, it is interesting that when my kids were taking AP classes that they took an awful lot of "practice tests."

Standardized tests are very expensive. Validating the tests and the questions is also expensive.

I didn't realize that all of the students didn't take SOL on same day.

I do not know about this merit pay for teachers when in fact Fairfax County Public School teachers have not had a raise for the last four years, and all of a sudden the state comes up with money to pay teachers for results that their students have shown on standarized tests. There is something wrong with this picture.

If they are serious about getting good teachers, they need to start with the administrators. Right now there are serious problems in the administrative ranks and the problems start at the top. Teachers will work hard if they see their administrator doing the same, showing commitment to the mission, and being fair in his/her assessments. This cannot be done by standardized testing alone. If it could, it would have been done long ago. The best and most ethical educators need to be promoted to the leadership positions. I don't think teachers perceive this to be what is happening right now. Any teacher in a school with such a fair and committed leader will support merit pay. Any teacher in a school without such a leader will not support it. And teachers who do not believe that their principals are fair and unbiased are uncertain about the administrators above those principals. There are several layers of bureaucracy involved in the system and teachers are on the bottom and hoping. The teachers are, of course, the most important part of the whole system.

The second thing is that even if merit pay rewards good teachers, it does not get rid of bad ones. Does McDonnell think the bad ones will leave over a few thousand dollars? Or is he merely trying to get teachers to teach in the "difficult" schools?

Too complex is right. Start at the top. How about Jack Dale and the school board. Until ethics takes a front seat, no one will trust any merit pay.

We won't need merit pay if a few other things happen.

1) Boost the starting pay for teachers (if possible) and advertise teaching as a noble and worthwhile profession again (stop bashing on teachers). Send the message to kids that school is an important place where they need to work hard.

2) Give starting teachers a smaller class load and a real mentor teacher who also has time off to help the new teacher succeed. Yes, this costs money. Maybe that $3 million could be used for this. Yes, this helps both the new teacher and the veteran teacher to become better teachers.

3) Give teachers some autonomy (stop Ecart testing---save money there) and applaud creativity in the classroom. Let teachers focus on skills and concept development instead of on memorization. Stop the testing madness. One test a year (especially in elementary school) should be enough to gauge progress. Constant paper/pencil or online testing is numbing and takes away from real instruction. Let students show what they have learned in more creative ways. How proud can a kid be about showing a standardized test score? Actually creating something is much more satisfying and "real". Nobody takes tests for a living.

4) Treat teachers like they are smart people. When you do this, you will get smart people coming into the profession (it's not rocket science). Do not give them a "paint by the numbers" curriculum. Do not box them into using "approved materials". Let them use the world if that will help the kids learn! They are the ones in a position to make those decisions. If you hire people who are smart and show good judgement (as you should), you will not have to make the "paint by number" curriculum. If you can't hire smart people, then the smart people are going elsewhere and the salary needs to be raised. Do what it takes to get good people, support them, and retain them.

5) Don't worry about having the latest and greatest gadgets, technology, and "extras". They mean nothing without a good teacher in the room. Save money in this area. These are the things that the school system thinks are important and look "glitzy" to outsiders (the "ooh" and "aaah" of the "stuff"). But in reality, a compact car will get you there just as well as a limo does.

6) Listen to the parents. Listen to the students. They are very wise and want the best. Let's give them the best that we can. They don't want pretty administrative buildings. They don't even expect the building their kid is in to be perfect. They do want their kid to get enough attention from a highly qualified instructor. Stop increasing class sizes.

There are many other things that can be done, but this is a start. We have been using the "high stakes" testing game now for years and we are not getting better outcomes.

The only teachers who do not embrace pay for performance are those teachers that are not performing.

FCPS Teacher Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The only teachers who do not embrace pay for
> performance are those teachers that are not
> performing.

Or those who have lived through it only to see it evaporate in a poor budget cycle. There were myriad reasons that it failed in FCPS in the late 80's (see Erica Jacobs article in the Washington Examiner) but it went kaput when they couldn't afford it. Reality means if you do actually have most teachers earning the merit pay, the county can't continue the program.

The teachers who got merit pay in the '80's were the ones who were willing to take their time to do a LOT of paperwork to justify how "good" they were.

"The only teachers who do not embrace pay for performance are those teachers that are not performing."


If that is the simple truth, it should be easy to get rid of poor teachers---just ask them if they want merit pay and if they respond with a "no", just fire them. Then we will have wonderful schools with wonderful results. Sounds easy, doesn't it?

If only it were so simple. Many who are in the system understand the complexities of this and good teachers don't necessarily agree with merit pay. They know what the posters above have written---that merit pay was tried before, that pretty soon you have only "good" teachers with merit pay and the system cannot afford it. There are better ways to make sure kids get a quality (and appropriate) education. First and foremost is recruiting good people (this is the secret in every company). Get the best and then give them what they need and enjoy to keep them there. No big secret deal here. Most teachers are not in it for the big bucks in the first place. Nobody goes into teaching to get rich. If the job allows for creativity and reward from a person's own initiative, that is part of the "payment". If the job continues to be micromanaged by the feds, the state, and way too many Gatehouse keepers, good people will run away. There is no fulfillment in being micromanaged. Growth on the part of the teachers and students does not occur that way. Freedom is essential to the process of creativity. This is what has kept America ahead of other countries. Unfortunately this is being quashed right now in our rush to become "Chinese". It is ironic that we are cutting the arts while China is adding them to their curriculum (since they see the value and were not able to afford them before, but now can). Test scores are not what makes America America. We have strengths (at least we did ) that cannot be measured that way. Wake up people! Stop drinking the kool aid that they keep putting out via the media.

We also have to stop believing that there is a certain measure of success that applies to every child. We are not all "equal" even though we want to force ourselves to be. We need appropriate education for each student. This does not mean that every student goes to college. It does mean that every student should gain a skill that will make them productive in our economy. It does mean that every person should find something that makes him/her feel like a meaningful and contributing person. It does not mean that we keep failing someone (yes, I have seen kids stay in a grade for 3 years---what good does that do?) or putting punitive consequences in place (that drive kids and schools into the ground). It means that we build upon each person's strengths. This is the way to a strong nation.

The focus on teachers is good in some ways, but it is not the only place we should be analyzing. The system has not been run into the ground completely and solely by the teachers. The whole thing needs an overhaul and if you don't fix the administration and the politics involved, you have fixed nothing. The new teachers are learning some very bad methods and they will be rote teachers. The ones who are retiring are taking vital teaching skills with them. We are in a very sad place if we don't turn this around.

I agree with the "retired" poster about the "paperwork" involved with making yourself look good. There are teachers who have National Board Certification. The paperwork to get that certificate is unbelievable. There used to be extra pay for those teachers (and FCPS has a fair share of them), but no more because of the budget. You could say that was merit pay that has gone away due to no funds available.

My child was placed in a seventh grade remedial reading class by a middle school principal based on ONE test he took in sixth grade. The sixth grade teacher was not consulted. He did great on his SOL's, but one part of his Stanford showed weakness. I can honestly say that he did not have difficulty reading. Perhaps, he did not feel well the day of the Stanford or perhaps he just blew it off.

The teacher of his remedial class is "board certified". She told me that he did not belong in the class, but that the "principal had placed him there." She did not have the guts to go to the principal and fight to get him out immediately. We had this discussion the first week of school. She did get him out at semester, but he missed out on an elective as a result. The other kids in the class (with one exception) were way, way below him.

This "board certified" teacher did not have the guts to challenge the principal. Is this what makes a good teacher? For what it is worth, the teacher was a very nice woman, but she wasn't willing to risk the principal's ire for the sake of my son.

I am still mad at myself that I did not challenge the principal on this.

Retired:

Thank you for writing that. I have a " nationally board certified" teacher working closely with me in my school right now. She is not someone I wanted to hire, but my boss (who did not spend much time teaching himself) was impressed with those credentials. I can tell you that she is one of the biggest "kiss ups" you can imagine. I saw a situation with a student much like the one you described about your son (the wrong class for the kid). The "Gatehouse" administrator (who ultimately had to "approve" any move for the student) tried to justify keeping the kid in the class and I tried to advocate for a move for the kid. I had actually tried to keep the student from going into this inappropriate class last summer, but was overruled by Gatehouse at that point. I tried again when the situation became very apparent after the child entered the class in the fall. The "board certified" teacher sided with the "Gatehouse" administrator because she is trying to get a job up there. The kid was not moved. I am still livid about it. This boys' parents are not able to be involved to help him. I can't say more without revealing too much---I still work in the system.

These are the games that are played that people who are not part of the system do not understand.

I am not saying that everyone who is Board Certified is like this teacher that I know. I am just saying that the process is far from perfect. I think that the best judgements are going to come from people who are closest to any given situation (and that includes granting national board certification).

McDonnell is giving $3 million to 169 schools. That is $17,750 per school. If the school has 50 great teachers, that is $355.00 per teacher. Sounds like a real incentive.