I don’t begrudge any teachers a little extra recognition. But the idea that it “will inspire and empower Alaska’s outstanding educators to use their expertise” is wrong. It won’t.
So I was very pleased this morning to see this in the paper:
Pearl Creek turns down state bonuses
By Robinson Duffy
rduffy@newsminer.com
Published August 24, 2007The teachers and staff at Pearl Creek Elementary School are telling the state thanks, but no thanks as far as the school’s recently awarded incentive bonuses are concerned.
The staff at the local school want the state to know they appreciate being recognized for the good work they do teaching kids, but that they don’t want an extra monetary reward for doing what they’ve already been paid to do.
Pearl Creek was one of 42 schools across the state whose staff were recently awarded cash bonuses because of student improvement on standardized assessment tests.
All the teachers at Pearl Creek as well as the principal and other certified employees each received $2,500, while the school’s other staff, including librarians, custodians, and secretaries, received $1,000 each.
Principal Mary Short said she and her staff were glad the state was taking notice of the good work going on at the school, but that as a group the staff felt the cash bonuses were inappropriate.
“Most of the discussion was about how uncomfortable the incentive program made us feel,” Short said, referring to a staff meeting she convened the week before school started where the staff decided to donate the bonus money from the state to nonprofit organizations or to districtwide education initiatives. “Most felt that (the money) should go to other schools.”
Short said her staff’s reactions to the incentive program, which was designed to award school employees when the students’ test scores as a whole at a school showed substantial increases from the year before, ranged from embarrassment that they would receive the money while other teachers at other schools would not, to anger that the state would assume a few thousand dollars would motivate the teachers to do a better job.
“It’s not that the school staff are lacking motivation. We are motivated already,” Short said. “We were quite offended that they (the state Department of Education and the Legislature) thought we needed motivation.”
That was certainly not the intent behind the incentive program, Les Morse, the director of assessment for the state Department of Education, said.
The bonuses weren’t meant to be a motivator, but rather a gesture of appreciation for a job well done.
“I think it says, ‘You did a darn good job, thank you,’” he said. “And in Fairbanks, Pearl Creek did a darn good job. In 2007, half their kids that were not proficient became proficient.
“The school actually got the award for exactly what the state Legislature set up the program to reward,” he said. “High-performing kids staying high performing and kids who were not proficient crossing the line to proficiency.”
Morse said he doesn’t quite understand Pearl Creek staff’s aversion to the bonuses, but respects their decision to use the money any way they wished.
“They don’t have to accept the money,” he said.
The staff at Pearl Creek aren’t the only ones who don’t like the new incentive program, which was put in place this year and has been authorized by the Legislature for the next two years.
Bill Bjork, the president of the Alaska chapter of the National Education Association, an educators’ union, said in a statement that the incentive program was unfairly biased toward schools with small enrollment numbers.
To back up that assertion, Bjork pointed out that of the schools that made the most improvement under the program and hence earned the largest bonuses — $5,500 per teacher — 80 percent had student bodies with fewer than 20 students.
“For any kind of performance incentive pay program to make sense, it’s got to be accessible to all the schools — not just the very small, or schools that have favorable demographics,” Bjork said.
Morse said Bjork’s assessment of the program didn’t make sense if you looked at the complete list of schools receiving awards this year.
Large schools in Anchorage, Fairbanks and the Mat-Su Valley received the bonuses.
Fair or not, the staff at Pearl Creek plan to use the incentive bonuses for the good of the whole community, Short said.
Each staff member will make the decision of what organization to donate his or her bonus to.
Some have expressed interest in nonprofit agencies serving children, such as Big Brothers Big Sisters, while others want to purchase art kits or other supplies to be available for teachers across the district.
Short said a group of her staff members will be writing letters to state officials and legislators discussing their displeasure with the incentive program and urging a different system.
“There’s got to be a more equitable way to support schools,” Short said.
Notice that the director of assessment for the State says that the reward wasn’t meant to be a motivator? I suppose he hasn’t seen their website, which tells us that “The goal of the program…is to serve as an incentive for all employees.” I love the part where he says he doesn’t understand.
Hats off to my colleagues at Pearl Creek! I hear you, and I agree, “We are motivated already.” Well done.
9 Comments
Doug, I’m appalled at the program and amazed and uplifted by the teacher response. After sitting through two days in a mandated district wide curriculum adoption training, and losing my self respect with each passing minute, this story has given me a reason to rally and say I’m happy about what I do. Those teachers have done us all proud. Thanks for sharing! – Mark
So once you strip away the Pearl Creek principal’s sanctimonious baloney, what she’s really saying is: “It’s more important for us to look noble than to accept free money that we could use to improve the teaching and learning environment in our classrooms.” As long as the money’s not coming from the Mafia or a drug cartel, who cares what it’s supposed to be a “reward” for? And it’s interesting that the news report (or at least the portion excerpted) doesn’t include a quote from any teachers. Wouldn’t the principal want the reporter to hear it from the horse’s mouth?
In response to John Kain: As one of the horse’s many mouths, I’d like to assure you that the principal’s words are not “sanctimonius baloney” and do accurately reflect the opinion of most staff members at Pearl Creek. We teachers agree that merit pay is bad educational policy. It is divisive of the broader school community, ineffective as a motivator of student test performance, inaccurate as to characteristics of meritorious teaching, and most importantly, a completely dunce-headed misallocation of funds that does nothing to address the social and economic realities of our neediest students. While we have wished to give our full attention to getting the school year off to a great start for our students, we have been distracted by the need to address this policy, and have spent hours in discussion trying to reach consensus as a staff in our response to these payments. While the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner article does not include all opinions generated by everyone affected (when has it ever?) I for one am glad that it is bringing the discussion forward. It will be up to every voting member of the community to make a change to this misguided policy.
Mary, thank you for speaking back to John Kain, and any others who would doubt your sincerity. The teachers at Pearl Creek have set a high mark for ethical responses to this misguided effort to manipulate the political discourse on educational achievement. I hope other teachers in the same position follow your lead.
Quoting from the News Miner’s editorial this morning regarding your collective response: “Bully for the staff at Pearl Creek for putting their money where their mouths are on this program.”
Again, thank you.
Mary, I stand corrected. I’m glad teachers bought into this decision. But I still don’t see how turning down free money helps your students.
John, I may be completely wrong here), but I think the reasoning behind the school’s refusal of the bonus was something along the lines of:
“Yes, we know that we worked hard. Yes, we know that, as a result of our effort, our students did better on these standardised tests. But just because our students did well, it doesn’t necessarily mean that we agree with the state’s decision to implement these tests in the first place, to say nothing of the fact that we as educators are 1) already paid for our work, and 2) are already motivated to work hard.”
This is putting words in their mouths, of course, and if it were me, I’d be ranting for several more paragraphs about the idiocy of standardised testing, but this is my interpretation for why the school refused to pocket the bonus money. Good for them.
Turning down free money helps our students by a) demonstrating that just because a gift horse is delivered, it isn’t necessarily the best idea to accept it; b) letting them know that test scores are not the reason we teach or they learn; c) teaching them to recognize that nothing comes for free, and that were we to accept that money, all sorts of socially and educationally distasteful strings would be attached (see above comments); and d) providing an opportunity for many of them to consider how lucky they are to live in stable, financially secure, loving home environments which allow them to perform to their best capabilities. It’s true that we could pool that money and purchase some cool stuff for the already fortunate kids at our school, but many of us feel that government money should be spent on leveling the playing field for all kids, which means more money for needier kids, not more money for kids who already have it made.
As an aside, it seems to me that merit pay should go to the kids and their parents as well as or even more so than to the teachers… isn’t the amount of time spent in school by 12th grade something like 11% compared to 89% out of school? Hmmm… who really has the biggest impact on student test performance? But again, although our government is in the habit of rewarding corporations that are already reaping revenues off the charts, I have this nagging belief that instead we should be putting “free” money where it can help kids most in need of it.
This is the end of my little rant here. I have to write to my legislators now.
This is a way cool website, Doug. Isn’t it weird that it took a merit pay bonus for me to find you?
Mary, I’m glad you found me here. I hope you check in again sometime.
John, feel free to do the same.
-thanks
Compare that with the article in our local paper that said _again_ that teachers make too much and proceeded to tell everyone about it. http://www.statesmanjournal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070826/ITK/708260336/1016
Although all our salaries are a matter of public record, you’ll find that many of the 65+ comments agree that pointing them out is more harmful than helpful. The author of this article has repeatedly demonstrated antagonism against our school district so this is hardly surprising, just frustrating.
There are so many more things that are more important than money; let’s just hope that we can get that message out with as much discussion as these articles have generated.
2 Trackbacks/Pingbacks
[...] interesting stories have come to my attention. Doug Noon’s blog had a story (and some interesting comments) about a school in Alaska that made great gains in [...]
[...] for teachers, but teachers don’t think much of it. In fact, one local school staff here even turned down the money in 2007. It’s the school my own kids [...]
Post a Comment