Culpeper is not Finland
Advertisement
Text size: small | medium | large
Leanne Jenkins
Published: August 1, 2008
These are my opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of the Culpeper County School Board.
Michael Dale’s recent letter advocating change in Culpeper’s schools is understandable in the sense that the American public school system greatly needs change (“New programs are bureaucratic wastes,” July 23).
While I wouldn’t debate Mr. Dale’s business experience, his knowledge of Culpeper schools is inaccurate and inflammatory. His comments are uninformed, unsubstantiated, irrelevant, unclear and sometimes contradictory.
Mr. Dale references “spending more money on programs that have failed.” What about adding programs without the funding? Our federal and state governments demand more of our schools, including functions beyond education. Meanwhile, these objectives are not funded by those levels of government; local districts are saddled with the burden.
The answer isn’t as simple as looking at Finland or Washington, D.C. Our schools cannot be taken out of the context of our community. Finland’s society is very different than America’s. Without Finland’s taxes and form of government, their schools wouldn’t work.
Michelle Rhee’s proposal for D.C. is not applicable. We’re already using funds from efficiency improvements. The suggestion that Culpeper pay for merit pay by driving “efficiency in and waste out” demonstrates Mr. Dale’s lack of knowledge. Unlike D.C., we’ve been commended for our efficiency.
When Johnson Controls did a study to improve our energy efficiency many of their suggestions were already in process. Still, we availed ourselves of the state’s program for an overall efficiency review.
Most recently, the Clare Booth Luce Foundation ranked us among top performers for cost effectiveness based on cost per pupil and academic performance. Over the last seven years our student performance has increased and our cost per pupil is extremely low.
No data driven process? There’s plenty of data. One just has to look at it. It says we’re doing well. It highlights areas to improve. We continue to re-evaluate and look for more opportunities to excel.
To suggest merit pay would fix our problems is overly simplistic. We are constantly attracting new people into the teaching profession. We have to do so, because of the number leaving. Our teachers already show publicly how good they are at their jobs!
Theoretically, I support merit pay, but with very substantial costs involved, I challenge Mr. Dale to produce studies that show a correlation between merit pay and academic performance:
-Is there a cost/benefit analysis? Produce a proven method to implement it well and fairly.
-Who would be willing to teach more challenging sub-groups?
-Who gets credit for the overachievers?
-Who will omnisciently and fairly assign students so that the teachers can be fairly compared?
-How does pairing teaching styles with individual student needs fit into that basis for assignment?
-How would we account for the progress of children from dysfunctional homes?
As a microcosm of our society, our schools face all of society’s problems. Teachers already face obstacles society creates. Many people would say that over the last 30 years, our society has deteriorated. Schools can’t fix everything, but that doesn’t change the belief that they should. We can’t tie teachers’ pay to overcoming any and all of our society’s ills.
Still, when teachers continue to improve students’ performance, where will the funds come from? When promised increases fail to appear due to a lack of funding, teachers would be justifiably angry. Meanwhile, other districts will continue to offer pay increases with which we cannot compete and which aren’t tied to an arbitrary, unjust and poorly defined measure of perform-ance.
We have to continue to improve our performance, but we must work with our society. To fix our schools, ask American educators! They know. Culpeper’s answers aren’t in Finland or D.C. Let’s fix the system — not destroy it further.
Leanne Jenkins represents the Jefferson District on the School Board. E-mail
Post a Comment
The commenting period has ended or commenting has been deactivated for this article.
Can't find what you're looking for? Try our quick search:
Reader Reactions
Posted by ( grjones ) on August 12, 2008 at 1:39 pm
publius,
“Those w/ influence” will not pay anyone they think they can kick in the teeth and get away with it. That’s how they get into positions of influence. That should be obvious right about now.
And doctors and lawyers are worse at self-polcing than any professions on the planet. Ask the guy whose trust got eaten up by the lawyer who was entrusted with the trust and the person who spent 8 hours waiting for treatment that was finally misdiagnosed by the doctor who finally saw him. And unfortunately “union mentality” appears to be the only remaining defense against those who wield their power with absolutely no concern for the people they are supposed to serve. And of course worn out shoes and 10-year-old wardrobes because the electric bill took most of last month’s salary doesn’t impact “the image of teachers w/ the public.“
Nice debating with you too, but currently I’m not teaching; I can’t afford a hobby.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( publius ) on August 12, 2008 at 11:34 am
grjones
I’m not attacking all teachers and principals; the vast majority that I know are good and some are great educators. I’m just trying explain why those w/ influence will not pay educators what they deserve. I want a new paradigm for the profession that the business types will embrace. Self-imposed standards,(like dr & lawyers) risk-taking in exchnage for higher compensation, and and end to the “union mentality” (strikes and protests) that hurts the image of teachers w/ the public. Its been a pleasure debating you, best of luck for a great school year.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( grjones ) on August 11, 2008 at 1:56 pm
Publius,
Don’t be so naive as to think that anyone would believe that all people in any profession are “all altruistic or self-motivated to be the best” (especially if they are paid at the same rate as teachers.)
I’m not sure how the issue came around to the question of tenure, but I’ll say this:
I am sure most teachers would be willing to give up tenure if it can be guaranteed that their jobs would not be terminated simply because their salaries had reached a point where a school system decides they can be replaced with “entry-level” people for less pay. Let’s say teachers could not be released without cause without just compensation (sound familiar?). That would seem fair, then you can do away with your tenure.
But you won’t improve any system without paying the people in that system a fair salary, and teachers’ salaries have been and continue to be anything but fair. And again when you base that lack of fairness on “limited resources” and come up with a half million bucks to satisfy some sociopolitical whim (as did five members of the CCSB), you are practicing hypocrisy at its most unconscionable limits. Please don’t try to evade that issue by attacking teachers and principals.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( publius ) on August 10, 2008 at 10:24 am
grjones
We agree on the basic problem, as you say, “we need to do things the way we’re supposed to”. While in your school you get a thorough evaluation that’s great and I’m pleased, but its not the same in all schools. When I hear first year teachers ask (in April), “aren’t my principals supposed to watch me teach?“ or when veterans say they haven’t seen principals in their rooms in 2-3 years! That’s not doing what you’re supposed to as a principal. Its not doing what you are suppose to as a leader whose job is to enhance the image of the profession when the CCEA president didn’t resign her post (not her job) when suspended by the board? The teachers in Culpeper failed to demand for her to step aside, particuarly when the community was being asked to increase taxes for teacher salaries. In my reality that makes the profession look bad. I’m for the standards of a true profession, like the AMA and ABA, not the AFL-CIO. Are all teachers in your reality doing what they’re suppose to? I bet you know teachers who are very negative towards students and parents,(I read your earlier comment) they bemoan and gripe about any professional development and teach the same boring way every year. What do you say about those teachers who don’t do as expected? Surely you recognize the variation in effort and talent among teachers? What’s wrong w/ rewarding those who are superior? My point about tenure is just plain economics and political reality. Business interests create the tax base on which public schools must function. Much of the political leadership is and (always will be) tilted towards business interests. They believe in the free market i.e. risk-reward tradeoffs, wages based on productivity, etc. They reject the way teachers are paid based on experience and they reject what they see as life-time employment w/ liitle risk. What has the NEA really accomphished w/ their tactics of strikes and protests after 30 years of edcuation reform? The tide of SOL & NCLB? Didn’t the NEA lose those battles in the political arena? My reality is based on history, human nature, economic facts, and strong political evidence here in Culpeper, across the state, and the nation that business groups have siezed the agenda of education. Don’t hang on to some false hope that the people in education are all altruistic or self-motivated to be the best. People will not suddenly “do what they’re suppose to”. Without positive incentives the average have little need to push themslves higher, and the threat of job loss (or income) seems to work as a motivater for many workers in other professions. If you prefer job security to high pay that’s a logical trade-off, just don’t expect both.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( grjones ) on August 08, 2008 at 10:08 am
Publius, with respect to your experience, I’m afraid you may be disconnected from reality. Administrators visit classrooms, set objectives, and evaluate. Teachers by nature share their ideas. MAs are a good indication of a professional’s grasp of his subject matter and should be valued highly. “Professional development” is required to maintain one’s teaching certificate and colleagues (dept. heads and principals) already rate performances. Teachers are required to communicate frequently w/parents. These are not new ideas. I’m afraid there’s little time left in a teacher’s day for “community outreach.“
And what you don’t seem to understand is that making more money is job security because it allows an individual the luxury of having reserves when it’s time to find a new job.
As far as tenure, if by the time a teacher has gained it, his/her work ethic, temperament, and ability to teach should have been established. Tenure is supposed to be the means to maintain academic freedom from political interests, it exists not simply for “job security”.
If a school board can fire a superintendent without cause and lose a half million, they certainly would “fire a good, senior teacher just to save money.“ Who are you trying to kid?
A 20% pay increase wouldn’t bring most Culpeper teachers’ salaries much beyond the poverty level, why should they give up tenure?
Look, we don’t need so much change as we simply need to do the things we are supposed to do. When a person acquires a teaching certificate, he’s supposed to have demonstrated his ability to teach, as well as having acquired a body of knowledge in a subject area that he can pass on to students. That’s supposed to be a given. If it’s not, then the problem lies with your higher education system. (Which is food for another discussion.)
You, like so many of today’s “change” addicts aren’t offering new ideas, you are giving old ideas new names. Things are not necessarily ineffectual because they are old, they are ineffectual because they are not being exercised.
And finally, I’m curious as to why you appear to think that “firing” people is the only solution to a problem and the ony means to “change”?!
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( publius ) on August 07, 2008 at 4:25 pm
Ms. Jenkins
Pay for performance has not worked because its criteria & incentives are misguided. (and based on my experience as a teacher many years ago, I doubt that many administrators did their job well enough to truly know what happens w/ teachers because they didn’t visit classrooms, set clear objectives, and use a thorough evaluation method, etc.) You say sharing among teachers stops w/ merit pay. What if part of the merit pay criteria was evidence of sharing good ideas and lessons? What if teachers were rewarded not just for Masters’ degrees (which are expensive to obtain), but for particpating in and demonstrating new skills learned through professional development? What if they were paid extra for teaching the toughest to teach kids? What if they got a bonus for communicating frequently w/ parents or engaging in community outreach? What if videotapes of their teaching was shown to colleagues and they, along w/ principals rated their performance? If the criteria is set correctly and administrators do their jobs well, I believe better pay for performance can work, and improve the profession, which ultimately will improve learning.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( publius ) on August 07, 2008 at 3:32 pm
grjones,
No one should put up w/ threats in the workplace or be mistreated by parents, students, superiors, that’s not the risk I am talking about. Shame on any prinicpal or school brd member who expects a teacher to so, and if they do, GET RID OF THEM! My point is that other professions make more money becuase they don’t have job security, and in our economic system higher risk carries higher rewards
Teachers will never get what they deserve until they take control of the profession and stop protecting the ones who are brunt out, just didn’t have the right temperment to work w/ kids or have the work ethic it takes to teach well. I was once a teacher and it is HARD WORK. While they are a minority, the continued existence of marginial or poor teachers (we all know they are there based on our experiences as students and as a parent)sends the wrong message to the public; that’s why merit pay is popular w/ business types like Dale. Anti-age,sex and race discriminantion laws now protect all workers. Unions once had their place in teaching because of such matters; they are now an impediment to higher pay. Given the teacher shortage and NCLB demands, do you think a school brd would fire a good, senior teacher just to save money?
I assume you are a teacher, would you take 20% pay increase & forgo tenure? If no, why not, are you so unsure of your skills in the marketplace that you are expendable? Good teachers don’t need tenure in the 21st century. They are in high demand, as the the world has changed since the 1960’s when teacher unions were useful. The public will never give the pay and respect you deserve as long as you hold onto the past, and ignore the fact that the teaching profession needs changing and that goes for administrators too.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( grjones ) on August 05, 2008 at 2:59 pm
Ms. Jenkins, you realize of course my comments were aimed at publius. I’m so angry with the people on the low end of the stick getting beat about the head and shoulders by those in charge who don’t give a tinker’s damn about the people whose lives they influence that I sometimes don’t make it clear to whom I’m speaking.
We both know what a difficult idea it is to base salaries on merit pay (I’m not sure a fair means exist; that’s why I’ve never supported it.) But I do know that until teachers are paid as professionals, such practices as tenure are their only means of security. We both know also that too many systems find a way to get rid of older teachers so they can hire new ones at reduced rates. About as detrimental a practice to the integrity of a system as could exist, but it happens. The only change we really need is to restore values and ignore those people whose only concern is what advantage they can gain for themselves. Teachers in Culpeper in my experience are the most mistreated lot in the profession. It’s really a wonder that you have any good ones left. It speaks only to their commitment to the community that they ever stay. And I’m amazed the community hasn’t demanded that five members of the board be recalled and run out of town on a rail.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( Leanne Jenkins ) on August 05, 2008 at 11:00 am
I’m not saying that there aren’t things about our school system that need to be changed. Change for change’s sake is senseless though. First, we need to look at what’s working and what’s not working. Our performance has improved because of the processes we have in place to do this. No, we’re not perfect or likely to be so, but we’re headed in the right direction and it would be nice if somebody actually acknowledged it for once instead of continuing to beat teachers up.
I know that there are teachers whose performance needs to improve. That’s true in every profession and that’s why we have evaluations, professional development and other assistance for teachers (not that it’s enough).
One reason pay for performance has been seen to reduce overall achievement is because teachers that are doing something that works don’t want to share it. Instead, they want to “win” the pay. We encourage our staff to share methods that work so that it helps everyone.
If testing, which produces objective criteria isn’t going to work, why would we think that subjective measures would work? Show me evidence of something that works (for merit pay) and I’ll consider it. I haven’t found it yet, nor do I know of anyone who has.
Most teachers put a huge amount of their time, effort, energy and hearts into our children. Unfortunately, it appears that teachers here aren’t in danger of getting higher pay regardless of their performance. That’s part of my argument.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( grjones ) on August 04, 2008 at 6:59 pm
Exactly what “Fair evaluation systems (not based on test scores’ would you suggest? “Are teachers bold enough to add risk in order to get higher pay?“ Let’s see, they must discipline children who sometimes threaten them physically, but they cannot touch a child. They must put up with total disrespect often without administrative support. A child who has misbehaved is sent to the office only to be returned without punishment. They’re cars are keyed, their cell phones and records are pilfered and stolen. They’re expected to put up with language a gutter rat wouldn’t bear. They face indignant parents who can’t believe their child doesn’t do his work and deserves a higher grade eventhough his average is below the grade he was given. It is of course always the teacher’s fault when a child fails to perform. A teacher is expected to give 30 students individual attention in 50 minutes of class time together with mainstreaming physically and mentally impaired - all in addition to being expected to have papers graded the next day and to mentor students after school. Appears as if there might be plenty of “risk” already involved. Oh yea and forget higher pay scales, they can’t even get the raises they’re supposed to get because the school board finds it “necessary” to change superindendents in the name of “change” and use what little money might be left in the public coffers to satisfy their own selfish whims. Let’s see if we can find more ways to slap teachers in the face and expect them to do a good job.
Report Inappropriate Comment