Money is a concern for most people these days. With prices rising on just about everything, the housing market and spending falling, and mass layoffs and unemployment beginning to outpace figures from last year, people are grasping for anything firm, solid, and stable.
In schools, that would be teacher salaries; though it’s not as if districts haven’t already tried to change the single salary schedule or -- as it’s euphemistically called -- the “steps and ladder” system.
With about 80 percent of most districts’ budgets going to salaries, reforming how teachers are paid has been an idea that has been around for some time, as I discovered in reporting on “The Merit Pay Conundrum,” in this month's issue of ASBJ.
Unfortunately, it’s been an idea that has failed many times for a host of reasons.
Take Texas, for example. In 2006, the state presented a school reform package that included two teacher bonus plans that together promised to be the largest educator incentive program in the nation. So, why have only a third of Texas’ districts jumped on the bandwagon? Well, as they say, the devil is the details.
The state Legislature allocated $148 million to the District Awards for Teacher Excellence (DATE) program, but it required districts to put up a 15 percent match. In addition, the legislature pinned the awards, which will begin next year, to improved test scores and similar student measures -- a tack that has been unpopular among educators.
But what really turned a lot of Texas school districts away was the uncertainty of future state funding for the program.
“When they looked at what it would take to be eligible for the program and the fact that state funds could not be guaranteed in future years, they had second thoughts,” Karen Moxley, president of the Grapevine-Colleyville Education Association, told the Dallas Morning News. The district backed out of the program after initially agreeing to participate.
The lesson here? In good economic times, but especially during bad ones, people yearn for stability -- even in bonuses.
Naomi Dillon, Senior Editor