REWARD Campaign PSA

President Obama Talks Education Reform

On Saturday, President Obama devoted his weekly address to the nation to a discussion the need for quality education reform. In his talk, the president emphasizes the need for sustained education reform policies at the state and local levels that produce results. He also briefly outlines his “Race to the Top” program that rewards successful new reform initiatives with federal dollars. According to the President, “reform just can’t wait,” and “education reform matters.” Check out the video.

Public Opinion Isn’t Working

To many, democracy is a powerful word. It means that the majority opinion will usually win out in the political arena, as long as such a policy does not deprive those in the minority of individual rights. Usually, public opinion drives politicians as well as policy. Let’s look at the numbers:

·
Opinion: 39% of Americans favor the use of increased nuclear power, while 52% oppose the measure. (Pew Charitable Trust)
Policy: A new nuclear power plant has not been built in the United States since 1973. (MSNBC)

Opinion: 49% of Americans favor the right to own a gun, while 46% are in favor of gun control laws. That figure is almost exactly the same as a September 2010 poll, which demonstrates little has changed, even after the recent shooting spree in Tucson, AZ. (Pew Charitable Trust)
Policy: States continue to be conflicted on gun control laws. 40 states have “right to carry” laws for guns which allow their citizens to carry concealed weapons. The states do however have varying restrictions. 4 states allow concealed carry with no restrictions, while the rest have varying levels of regulatory control. (NRA)

Opinion: 58% of Americans are opposed to the Don’t Ask Don’t Tell (DADT) policy and are in favor of openly gay men and women serving in the military. Only 27% are in favor of the policy.
Policy: On December, 22^nd, 2010, President Obama signed a bill repealing DADT.

There are many more examples of public opinion dictating policy change, but sometimes the majority doesn’t win out. Such is the case with merit pay initiatives for public school teachers. According to a September 2010 Time Magazine poll, 61% of respondents thought teachers were underpaid, 64% thought that at least part of teacher evaluations should be based on standardized test scores, 66% opposed tenure for public school teachers, and a booming 71% of those polled supported merit pay (Time Magazine). Despite the vast majorities in public opinion polling, few districts have instituted the practice. A recent report from the National Center on Performance Incentives (NCPI), located at Vanderbilt, outlines the bleak numbers. According to the study, “merit pay plans for teachers have been implemented in no more than 500 school districts out of some 14,000 districts nationwide, only 3.5 percent of the total.” (Education Next)

The electorate is more in favor of merit pay than ending DADT, gun control or gun liberalization, and a moratorium on nuclear power plants. Politicians must listen to the overwhelming public opinion, align policy with populism, and push for merit pay provisions in future education reform bills.

---

The 4 Biggest Obstacles to Merit Pay Reform Efforts

We’ve talked frequently on this blog about the heroic individuals striving to reform America’s education system as well as the many state and local efforts to institute merit pay proposals. This country does not, however, have a widely utilized merit pay system for public school teachers. What has become clear throughout our efforts to update all of your about the current education reform environment are the reasons why merit pay hasn’t been implemented as widely as it should be. What follows is a brief summary of those reasons, and what ways reformers can try to overcome these obstacles.

1. Unfair or Unclear Evaluation Standards: This is the biggest complaint, and perhaps the most justified, from teachers and other education professionals. Creating a system that standardizes and accurately evaluates educators is not easy. Should more weight be put on increases in student test scores or principal evaluations? How do you incorporate subjective criteria like peer or student review, when those data points will be inherently biased? How do you ensure that teachers and principals don’t bring their own personal feelings about other teachers into the decision-making process? All of these concerns are valid, but none of them are reason enough not institute such a system, just as any difficult problem should not be abandoned because of its challenges. We can try to understand and address these fears. One thing that we can do is incorporate several evaluation criteria into the performance standard, that includes principal recommendations, peer assessments, objective, numerical data like test scores, and the kinds of subjects being taught. In addition, government officials must work with teachers to develop the standard that they will be evaluated by.

2.Union Pressures: Another very common obstacle to reform is the pressure from teachers’ unions to oppose merit pay proposals. The reality is that not every current teacher will be rewarded by the reward campaign, which places unions in an uncomfortable position. Although the reward bill will benefit many of America’s finest teachers, it will also require some to find new lines of work. Unions are perhaps justifiably concerned with merit pay proposals and how they will affect their least productive members. What this bill, as well as other merit proposals, do not do, however, is take away collective bargaining power. Teachers’ unions are still able to bargain for the length of the school day, for equal pay for men and women, and should bargain for increased pay generally and for their most productive and successful members. The American Bar Association and American Medical Association laud their most successful members, while it often seems that teachers’ unions are there for the support of the lowest common denominator. We’ve also seen how unions can be the greatest allies in the effort to reform America’s schools. In Indiana, union officials were extremely supportive of the state’s new reform efforts, and it was no coincidence that recent efforts in that state are the closest to an ideal merit pay solution. Just like teachers must be included in the evaluation structure, unions must be included in the formulation process. It is vital to make sure they understand collective bargaining rights will not be compromised as well as stress that the majority of their members will make more money under merit pay bills.

3. Possible Cost Increases: If teachers are paid more, the money has to come from somewhere. Many deficit hawks and budget wonks will be leery of increasing education expenditures. In addition, the costs would most likely be passed on to the state and local governments, even if merit pay was instituted at the federal level. The national government pays for only nine percent of all education spending. In California, for example, education spending is 52% to 55% of the state budget (California Department of Finance), but education spending varies across state lines. According to the Federal Education Budget Project, “Per pupil spending – which includes funding from federal, state, and local sources – ranged from as little as $5,978 per pupil in Utah to as much as $17,620 per pupil in New Jersey in school year 2007-08" (Federal Education Budget Project). To be certain then, the budgetary impact on merit pay proposals would affect different states and different levels of government quite differently. It would have little impact on the federal budget. In the end, this hurdle comes down to a value judgment. Do states value increased education spending or tax breaks? To be sure, both education spending and a balanced budget are important, but they are not mutually exclusive, and the merit pay proposals, including the REWARD bill would not preclude states from achieving fiscal responsibility.

4. The Status Quo and other Political Obstacles: Finally, reformers will have to tackle the status quo as well as political obstacles. According to a lecture given by Geoffrey Canada at Dartmouth College on April 25^th, teachers’ unions are the single largest campaign contributor in the United States. Democrats, and some Republicans, are, in part, able to succeed in politics because of the substantial political support that teachers’ unions garner. The powerful groups deliver not only votes but also produce financial benefits, and provide volunteers to knock on doors, make phone calls, and provide other support for the campaigns themselves. In some ways this problem is similar to the others we’ve talked about. Teachers’ unions have an interest in maintaining power over their members and at all points during the political process. Losing any members of the union, even if it means gaining new members, is not politically popular. The status quo is a powerful force to overcome, but reformers need to talk about common sense solutions (like the REWARD bill and other merit pay proposals) to important problems in order to combat the illogical arguments of many entrenched interest groups.

---

Nevada Aims for Education Reform

Nevada lawmakers are the most recent group attempting to change the state of education in this country. Two measures have been approved by the Senate Education Committee. The first amendment would require that at least fifty percent of teacher evaluation criteria is based on student academic achievement; the second reform would require all school districts to institute pay for performance programs for public school teachers. According to reports, the committee also voted to “extend a mandatory probationary period for new teachers to three years and send teachers back to probation if they receive unsatisfactory evaluations two consecutive years.”

Unfortunately, several reform efforts stalled in the committee, which voted down an amendment to end “last in, first out” practices of teacher layoffs. That system requires that the most recent teachers to be hired are the first to be fired if districts are forced to institute layoffs, instead of other factors like performance, classroom absence, disciplinary history, or a criminal record.

The article, while certainly promising, highlights the political difficulties inherent in education reform proposals. The Senate Education Committee is comprised of four Democrats and three Republicans. On many of the most “controversial” measures, like the last in, first out policy, members of the committee voted strictly on party lines, with the four Democrats defeating the proposals. Education has become a “Democratic issue” in this country, but upon closer investigation it is clear that this does not refer to the passage and proposal of good policy. Democrats garner some of their most reliable and massive political support from teachers and union officials. They risk losing money, man power, campaign support, and votes if they vote in favor of amendments that put quality education above the entrenched interests of teachers (good or bad). In order for education reformers to successfully leap these political hurdles, Democrats in state and national legislatures must chose to put the needs of America’s students ahead of job security for bad teachers.

More information can be found here: http://www.lvrj.com/news/teacher-tenure-reform-bills-advance-to-senate-vote-122381909.html?ref=909

Value-added: An important measure

A fantastic study published by the Brookings Institute called “Evaluating Teachers: The Important Role of Value-Added,” explores the benefits and challenges of a system that evaluates teachers by their students improvement on objective measures like standardized tests.

Here are the main points of the study and discussion:

Current evaluation systems that use principals to evaluate teachers end up classifying 99 percent of teachers as effective. Obviously principal evaluations alone cannot accurately determine a teacher’s effectiveness.

Value-added is “not a perfect system of measurement,” but it can “complement” other measurements like parent and student feedback, observations, and self assessments.

Many teachers are skeptical of value-added systems because they are afraid of being labeled as bad teachers solely because of their students’ test scores. “But framing the problem in terms of false negatives places the focus almost entirely on the interests of the individual who is being evaluated rather than the students who are being served. It is easy to identify with the good teacher who wants to avoid dismissal for being incorrectly labeled a bad teacher. From that individual’s perspective, no rate of misclassification is acceptable.”

The authors of this study illustrate the problem with this argument well when they point out that SAT scores are only moderately correlated to success in college, and between-season batting averages for baseball players are only moderately correlated to professional batting averages. Nevertheless, we use these measurements because they are the best we have. In the authors’ words, “We should not set unrealistic expectations for the reliability or stability of value-added. Value-added evaluations are as reliable as those used for high stakes decisions in many other fields.”

Value-added measurements are especially important when we examine the alternatives for measuring teacher performance: seniority (experience) or principal evaluations. This study finds that value-added measurements are the best way to determine effectiveness.

Teachers are worried that value-added indicators unfairly measure their effectiveness. While it is true that value-added will not be a perfect measure, it is still an important one. Combining an objective measure of student performance with more objective measurements is the only way to create a fair and comprehensive evaluation system.

StudentsFirst: A Call for Respectful Education Reform Dialogue

It is important to remember that in the education reform debate, teachers, unions, school administrators, government officials, parents, and students all have a lot at stake. Each party in the reform movement, however, is either fighting for personal reasons (i.e. for government officials to keep their jobs), for selfless reasons (i.e. what’s in the best interest of your child), or a combination of the two. While all of the sides may disagree about the problems within the American education system as well as the perceived effectiveness of proposed solutions, each party in the reform debate does not have to be disagreeable. One would hope, that at least on some level, all parties involved are advocating for greater success among American public school children, and that is a goal that we can all agree on. Unfortunately, education reform debates have turned ugly in many areas recently.

Olivia Demas, a mother of three from Ohio blogged Sunday on the Students First website about the actions that many opposed to education reform measures are taking to halt progress. While I’m sure that both sides of the debate have, at times, been less than civil, the drastic responses from teachers, unions, and other official outlined by Demas must end. Active debate in the education arena should be encouraged, but when that debate turns into the usurpation of free speech rights and the intimidation of parents and teachers who want the best for their kids, we fail to have a constructive dialogue and all parties in the education reform domain lose out, one way or another.

The article, published on StudentsFirst, can be found here: http://www.studentsfirst.org/blog/entry/a-call-for-civility/