Since Wisconsin was singled out by U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan for having what he called a "ridiculous" block against tying student performance to the evaluation of teachers, 80th District Assemblyman Brett Davis, R-Oregon, has been leading the merit pay bandwagon in Madison.
He and Sens. Alberta Darling, R-River Hills, and Randy Hopper, R-Fond du Lac, in September introduced legislation that would allow Wisconsin school districts to use student achievement data to determine how well teachers are doing their jobs. Frankly, money was the motivating factor behind the legislation. Because Wisconsin does not allow student test scores to be used in teacher evaluations, it stands to miss out on millions of dollars from the federal "Race to the Top" program.
But there's also a practical, positive impact the legislation would have on schools. Wisconsin ranked poorly in the National Council on Teacher Quality report released last winter on how states keep good teachers and remove bad ones. The state's districts don't, or can't, do enough to reward quality teachers and get rid of the ineffective ones.
On Friday, Davis and Darling introduced a second piece of legislation, the "Teacher Honor Roll Act," which would provide teachers incentives to meet student performance goals set by their school districts. It is, Davis and Darling said in a news release Friday, "the next logical step of pay for performance."
The Teacher Honor Roll Act would direct $1 million in existing state Department of Public Instruction (DPI) dollars to Wisconsin school districts choosing to have their schools participate in a pay-for-performance program. The participating districts would have to match the state's $1 million investment, something that could be an impediment to cash-strapped schools.
School boards then would choose from a series of measurable goals, which Davis and Darling said include raising low or maintaining high test scores; and improving attendance, drop-out, graduation and achievement gap rates. In schools that meet the selected objectives, teachers would receive bonuses of $1,500 and other school staff would receive awards of $750.
"While performance pay will reward our best educators, it will be our public school students who gain the most," Davis said. He also said it's "time our best teachers were rewarded for their performance."
True, it is. The good teachers in our state schools are worth every penny they're paid. Financial incentives to encourage and keep them would be wise investments by the state and local school districts.
However, the Teacher Honor Roll Act must not translate into additional state spending. Darling told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel on Friday that she believes the state can find the money to pay for the program by redirecting it from existing sources. This may be easier said than done, but it must be done.
It also will be important to ensure that the bill doesn't reward individual teachers who aren't carrying their weight toward meeting a district's goals. Districts will get better when teachers are judged and rewarded on their own merit, more than on how well the schools are performing overall.
Finally, a key element to the legislative proposal is that it allows local school boards to establish the goals, with guidance and approval from the DPI. The decisions on how to evaluate teacher performance are best made at the local level. It's an element in the bill that must be preserved.
Certainly, there's more than enough merit to the Teacher Honor Roll Act to warrant discussion in the Legislature. We commend Davis for continuing to lead on issues of merit pay for teachers.
He and Sens. Alberta Darling, R-River Hills, and Randy Hopper, R-Fond du Lac, in September introduced legislation that would allow Wisconsin school districts to use student achievement data to determine how well teachers are doing their jobs. Frankly, money was the motivating factor behind the legislation. Because Wisconsin does not allow student test scores to be used in teacher evaluations, it stands to miss out on millions of dollars from the federal "Race to the Top" program.
But there's also a practical, positive impact the legislation would have on schools. Wisconsin ranked poorly in the National Council on Teacher Quality report released last winter on how states keep good teachers and remove bad ones. The state's districts don't, or can't, do enough to reward quality teachers and get rid of the ineffective ones.
On Friday, Davis and Darling introduced a second piece of legislation, the "Teacher Honor Roll Act," which would provide teachers incentives to meet student performance goals set by their school districts. It is, Davis and Darling said in a news release Friday, "the next logical step of pay for performance."
The Teacher Honor Roll Act would direct $1 million in existing state Department of Public Instruction (DPI) dollars to Wisconsin school districts choosing to have their schools participate in a pay-for-performance program. The participating districts would have to match the state's $1 million investment, something that could be an impediment to cash-strapped schools.
School boards then would choose from a series of measurable goals, which Davis and Darling said include raising low or maintaining high test scores; and improving attendance, drop-out, graduation and achievement gap rates. In schools that meet the selected objectives, teachers would receive bonuses of $1,500 and other school staff would receive awards of $750.
"While performance pay will reward our best educators, it will be our public school students who gain the most," Davis said. He also said it's "time our best teachers were rewarded for their performance."
True, it is. The good teachers in our state schools are worth every penny they're paid. Financial incentives to encourage and keep them would be wise investments by the state and local school districts.
However, the Teacher Honor Roll Act must not translate into additional state spending. Darling told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel on Friday that she believes the state can find the money to pay for the program by redirecting it from existing sources. This may be easier said than done, but it must be done.
It also will be important to ensure that the bill doesn't reward individual teachers who aren't carrying their weight toward meeting a district's goals. Districts will get better when teachers are judged and rewarded on their own merit, more than on how well the schools are performing overall.
Finally, a key element to the legislative proposal is that it allows local school boards to establish the goals, with guidance and approval from the DPI. The decisions on how to evaluate teacher performance are best made at the local level. It's an element in the bill that must be preserved.
Certainly, there's more than enough merit to the Teacher Honor Roll Act to warrant discussion in the Legislature. We commend Davis for continuing to lead on issues of merit pay for teachers.
