Teacher Merit Pay is on the Way in Tennessee

Article Via: Andy Spears - April 19, 2013 

The Tennessee State Board of Education met today and gave approval on first reading to two proposals that essentially mandate teacher merit pay starting in the 2014-15 school year.
The first proposal, effective in the 2013-14 year, removes the automatic step increases now mandated for each additional year of service.  Instead, teachers would earn a mandated base salary plus an additional amount in years 1-5, 6-10, and 11-15.  Teachers with an advanced degree would earn a higher additional amount in essentially the same time blocks.  Here are the details.

This proposal is somewhat similar to the pay plan adopted last year by Metro Nashville Public Schools that front-loaded pay, making starting salaries about $6000 higher and raising pay for most all teachers in the system, but capping any years of service increases at year 15.

The plan guarantees that no teacher may see their salary go down as a result of the adoption of this pay plan. Some teachers, however, would likely be at or above the new mandated ranges and so may not see any pay increases for a few years, depending on how their local school systems handle the pay issue.

The idea is to free up funds currently used for step increases for teachers so those funds may be used to differentiate pay among teachers.

To that end, the Board adopted another proposal effective in 2014-15.  It mandates that all systems develop a differentiated pay plan to be approved by the Department of Education.  The plan is to be merit-based and essentially must depend on either 1) filling hard to staff schools or hard to fill subjects and/or 2) rewarding performance as determined by the state’s new and ever-evolving teacher evaluation system.

Aside from the fact that performance pay doesn’t seem to work that well, there’s no indication of how districts will locate the funds necessary to make these pay adjustments work.  That is, aside from the funds that may be freed up from ending mandatory step increases, there’s no movement to add state funds to the pot to allow for significant incentives.  In fact, the base pay plan adopted by the Board simply doesn’t go far enough toward establishing an effective base.  Moving the base closer to $40,000 is part of an education agenda designed to make a meaningful impact on Tennessee schools.
Performance pay plans almost always cost more money than the step/level plans.  That doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be pursued, but it does mean money is necessary to make them work.  Metro Nashville’s compressed pay plan cost $6 million in year one.  In Denver, where a performance pay plan has been in effect for a number of years (ProComp), the average teacher now makes $7000 more per year than they did under the old plan.  Paying teachers more is a good thing and a key component of investing in teachers to help improve schools.  But absent state dollars, it’s unclear where or how local districts will find the money to make this proposal work.

Further, because local teachers’ associations no longer have the power to bargain collectively, there is no requirement of input on new plans by teachers.  Local Boards may consult any party they wish or simply adopt an approved plan and impose it on the teachers of their district.  Of course, consulting those whose pay you are about to change about how they’d like to see it improved makes sense, but that doesn’t mean local districts will do that. And the State Board doesn’t require such collaboration.
Some (StudentsFirst) have indicated that because of this year’s teacher and state employee pension reform, there will be more money available in the state budget.  They’ve suggested using that money to improve teacher pay.  The first savings should be realized in 2014-15.  So, it will be interesting to see if there are legislative proposals that incorporate the savings from pension reform into funds available to districts for the performance pay scheme that will soon be mandated from the State Board of Education.  It will also be worth watching to see if the Board makes any movement on giving teacher base pay a meaningful increase.

Tennessee has experimented with performance pay before.  The Career Ladder program was implemented by Governor Lamar Alexander.  It was funded for a time, then became expensive, then was stopped, and is now being phased out — with fewer and fewer Career Ladder teachers remaining in service each year.

The point is, without careful planning and implementation, the proposals adopted on first reading today and likely headed for final approval in July may do nothing but put added financial pressure on local governments.  Local school districts should watch cautiously and should ask their legislators to put forward plans to use state money to fund these proposals.  While it is not clear performance pay will even have the intended positive results, it will surely fail if there is no commitment in the form of investment from those backing the plan.

TN teachers would lose money under pay plan, critics say

Article Via: June 21, 2013 - By Lisa Fingeroot, The Tennessean

Tennessee teachers marshaled their forces and House Democrats hurled insults at Education Commissioner Kevin Huffman on Thursday over concerns that teachers will lose money if the state adopts a controversial plan today to require merit pay.

The pay plan, part of a drive to boost student test scores, would eliminate traditional salary increases for teachers based solely on years of experience and advanced degrees. The state Board of Education is expected to approve it today.
Members already gave the proposal a nod of approval in April when Huffman presented it.

The Tennessee Education Association, the state's only teacher union and largest professional organization, opposed the pay plan from the beginning and has been assembling a group to show opposition at today's meeting. TEA also has been distributing a pay chart supporting its claim that teachers would lose money under the plan.

House Democrats amped up the opposition Thursday when they called a news conference to oppose the plan and throw their support behind the union.

"It's hard to find a commissioner in the history of Tennessee that has assembled a more broad track record of complete failure than Commissioner Huffman," said state Rep. Mike Stewart, a Democrat from Nashville. "Everything this guy has done - every experiment he has tried has so far - has ended in failure, so it's shocking that we would still be listening to this same person."

Stewart was joined by several other Democrats, including state Rep. Gloria Johnson, a teacher from Knoxville, who said she vehemently opposes the pay plan because it eliminates most raises for years of experience and advanced degrees. That's like breaking a promise made to teachers who have been working for years on getting advanced degrees, the Democrats said.

Johnson said many experienced teachers also worry that bonuses would be unfairly distributed.
Huffman responded to the criticism in a written statement. "It is unfortunate that some groups and elected officials are presenting inaccurate information," he wrote. "It is against Tennessee law for any school district to cut a teacher's pay. Additionally, this administration has added more than $130 million in state money for teacher salaries over the past three years. We will continue to look for ways to increase teacher pay, decrease state mandates, and increase local control of school decisions."
Under the plan, no teacher could earn less than he or she currently earns, and the step pay raises usually received at six years and 11 years of experience are included as safeguards.

Huffman said the plan is not a pure merit pay plan because each district can determine how it will differentiate pay. For example, Tennessee certified only 50 chemistry teachers last year, and districts might use a larger salary to attract a chemistry teacher.

While the TEA's chart shows the state-mandated base pay of teachers staying almost flat except for the two step increases, it does not include any amounts for the bonuses and raises that could be earned under Huffman's plan.

Mixed reaction from teachers Teachers from Trousdale County, where a differentiated plan is being piloted, expressed support for the way they are paid.

"I think it's a great plan," said fourth-grade teacher Chris Freeman. "I think it rewards teachers for doing a superb job. It's tailor-made for me. I'm in charge of my own destiny. I control my own children and my own scores."

His colleague, Laura Wilson, chose not to join the alternative plan. "I was scared to take a risk," she said. She admits to being disappointed, however, when she realized she lost about $4,000 in bonuses by not being in the plan.

Rutherford County special education teacher Jennifer Tidwell is so concerned about all the changes being made for teachers that she is considering another profession.

"It's like you're running and kicking sand and not getting anywhere," she said. "They keep moving the goal."

Tidwell's students tend to have individual education plans that can include very simple tasks that cannot be tested. She worries that her achievements might go undocumented for determining pay raises.

"That's what I am kind of afraid of," she said. "I don't have a problem with merit pay, but I have a problem with the way (achievement is) measured."

In Trousdale County, special education teachers are hard to find, so they are rewarded with a bonus every year for working in the system. High school chemistry and physics teachers also are rewarded.
"We're kind of like a guinea pig," said system Director Clint Satterfield. "I think the main goal is to improve teacher quality, because if we improve the quality of the teacher, we will improve the outcome for students."