Just
for the sake of leading in, it is negligent to talk about education these days
without mentioning the changes being made in the controversial program known as
No Child Left Behind (NCLB). Enacted in 2001 by then-President George W. Bush,
the bill was best known for giving teachers and administrators headaches from
coast-to-coast.
While
the reasoning behind the bill made sense, it was never a realistic proposal. Over
the 13-year course of the plan, schools were required to incrementally improve
their standardized test scores every year. What many people do not realize is
the pattern of the improvement. Most of the gains were slated for the years
2011-2014. On a graph, the improvement curve looked like the first half of the
Griffin roller coaster at Busch Gardens. For those who do not live in the
Williamsburg, Virginia area, let’s just say the curve was about to become very
steep. And the numbers were not good. In my region of Virginia, only six of 37
schools in Newport News met the Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) goals, while only
five of 31 accomplished the feat in neighboring Hampton. Even more suburban
systems such as York and Williamsburg-James City had percentages in the 30-40%
range.
Arne
Duncan, the current Secretary of Education, has been given a lot of money and
freedom to run his department. He will probably go down as the most powerful
DoE leader ever. His initial plan called “Race to the Top” pitted states
against each other for Federal funds. This plan was met with mixed results,
usually criticized by the states losing out on money.
His
plan to rework the entire NCLB plan to include room for more classroom
creativity and less “teaching to the test” should be met as a positive sign in
American schools. The jury will remain out while this is reworked, but the
stage is now set for a true meaningful change to be made in our educational
system. Many hope that Duncan and his associates take advantage of this
opportunity.
With
this in mind, I’d like to make a modest proposal with regard to the teacher
salary plan.
Are teachers underpaid? It depends on where you live
and who you ask. In Virginia, the starting salary ranges from about $33,000 in
the most rural divisions to the following in its larger divisions. These
numbers are based on a 10-month scale having a bachelor’s and master’s degree.
(Data found on the websites of the various school systems through the Virginia Department of Education website at http://doe.virginia.gov)
(Data found on the websites of the various school systems through the Virginia Department of Education website at http://doe.virginia.gov)
Starting Teacher Salary With a Bachelor’s/Master’s
Alexandria $ 43,632/ 50,047
Arlington 43,910/
48,412
Fairfax
Co. 44,440/
49,928
Harrisonburg 39,214/ 41,764
Norfolk 38,012/ 41,053
Richmond 39,712/
41,697
Roanoke 36,604/ 37,967
VA
Beach 38,597/ 41,097
The bottom of the scale begins to widen after the
first 5-10 years, but here’s what the same teacher can expect to be making
after 20 years, and the final number is the highest possible salary on the
teacher scale for a standard contract:
Alexandria 75,299/ 92,313 99,063 with a Masters plus 30 credits
Arlington 65,256/ 87,450 101,298
with a Doctorate
Fairfax
Co. 74,395/ 79,884 93,015
with a Doctorate
Harrisonburg
47,377/ 49,927 67,229
with a Doctorate
Norfolk 59,854/ 64,642 70,460
with a Doctorate
Richmond 49,818/ 52,307 71,664
with a Masters plus 30 credits
Roanoke 52,197/ 53,562 60,851 with a Doctorate
VA
Beach 54,098/ 56,598 70,014
with a Doctorate
There
is an obvious disparity among the regions within the state, but outside of
Northern Virginia, a teaching position pays equivalent to a GS-7/8/9 government
job. Here’s what the GS scale in the Washington DC Metro area looks like
7
|
42209
|
43616
|
45024
|
46431
|
47838
|
49246
|
50653
|
52061
|
53468
|
54875
|
8
|
46745
|
48303
|
49861
|
51418
|
52976
|
54534
|
56092
|
57649
|
59207
|
60765
|
9
|
51630
|
53350
|
55070
|
56791
|
58511
|
60232
|
61952
|
63673
|
65393
|
67114
|
10
|
56857
|
58752
|
60648
|
62544
|
64439
|
66335
|
68230
|
70126
|
72022
|
73917
|
11
|
62467
|
64548
|
66630
|
68712
|
70794
|
72876
|
74958
|
77040
|
79122
|
81204
|
12
|
74872
|
77368
|
79864
|
82359
|
84855
|
87350
|
89846
|
92341
|
94837
|
97333
|
The
arguments here become obvious. To the full-time government employee, it’s “well,
they have summers off!” For the teachers, the cry is “we have to do all this
extra unpaid work and we never have enough time!”
Both
arguments are valid and true. The typical teacher contract consists of a
195-200 day work schedule, with additional requirements to complete 180 hours
of professional development during the term of each license (5 years). Taking
two graduate courses can satisfy this requirement, but at least half of this
can be accomplished through regular faculty meetings and division-wide
development training.
Considering
that eliminating summer school is not an option (by the way, teachers can make
between $1500 and $5000 extra depending on the pay plan - usually $22-30/hr. –
and length of term – four to eight weeks), what can be done?
Notwithstanding
any upcoming merit pay plans, my solution is to add 20 mandatory days to the
teacher contract. The first 10 days would be added to the end of June and
involve a student remediation session. This could be used as a way for some students
to avoid summer school, if used properly. If a student meets certain academic
benchmarks, they can stay home. This time can also be used for debriefing and
reflection among the teachers and staff. Under the current contract structure,
teachers pack up on the last day and leave without having an opportunity to
look back at the past year and determine where ideas went right or wrong. With
remediation, it could be possible to reduce the amount of time and resources
needed for a summer session.
The
other two weeks would be added before the current check-in date in mid to late
August. These two weeks would be devoted to professional development and school
meetings. The current argument from teachers is that they come to school for
5-8 days of preparation and spend most of the time in meetings (school-wide,
division-wide, grade level, content level, team level, etc…). There is not
enough time to plan one’s lessons, decorate the classroom, get to know the new
teachers and make general preparations for the first day of school. My proposal
suggests getting the professional development out of the way first, and then
allowing for the 5-8 days to be used strictly for class preparation, which is
the most important element of education. It will lead to a much smoother
transition into the school year and alleviate some of the time teachers have to
spend working at home, or the late afternoons/evenings in the school building.
For
working these extra days, teachers would be paid based on their current
contract, but generally this would result in a 10% raise.
Of
course, there are a number of elements to be added into the mix, with the first
being funding. However, my belief is that this covers a lot of angles including
higher teacher pay, meeting greater community expectations, more classroom time,
more potential face time with troubled students and a greater sense of teamwork
within a school building.
I’d
love to open this forum and hear from those in favor and those opposed. If I
may make a request, please, use the comment link to respond as opposed to my
Facebook page, if possible J