A Public Education Merit Pay System That's Working

Two arguments made (in this forum and elsewhere) against implementing a merit pay system in public education are 1) objective evaluations of the jobs that teachers do are not possible and 2) teachers are motivated differently than are members of other professions, so merit pay would not improve the quality of education.

Brad Jupp, the sixth gentleman on the list of Edutopia magazine’s "Daring Dozen…Who are Reshaping the Future of Education" (h/t Kiersten Marek of Kmareka) casts serious doubt on the idea that these points should end the discussion of merit pay. Edutopia describes Mr. Jupp as a "Teacher Pay Trailblazer"…

When Brad Jupp became lead negotiator for the Denver Classroom Teachers Association in 1990, he recalls, the union and the Denver Public Schools were "highly committed adversaries." In 1994, as the two parties sparred over policy and pay, Jupp led a five-day teacher strike. The upshot was a paltry boost in pay raises from 1 percent to 1.2 percent, and a revolution in Jupp's vision of collective bargaining.

Now, twelve years later, having fostered cooperation between the two former antagonists, Jupp has successfully spearheaded a groundbreaking reform of teacher pay. In 2004, union members ratified the Professional Compensation System for Teachers, the nation's most comprehensive overhaul of a system that has until now rewarded teachers equally whether they work hard or just show up. Last November, Denver voters sealed the deal by approving an annual $25 million property tax hike to fund the initiative…

Under the new system, also called ProComp, teachers will receive raises higher than their regular cost-of-living boosts for, among other things, exceeding expectations of student growth on the state test, meeting student-growth objectives set collaboratively by teachers and supervisors, and earning positive performance evaluations. The system provides additional bonuses to teachers working in hard-to-fill positions and hard-to-serve schools.

An article by Mr. Jupp in the Spring 2006 issue of the Hoover Institution journal Education Next describes the details of the ProComp plan…

Denver teachers hired before 2006 have a choice between the traditional salary schedule and this four-dimensional merit pay system. Teachers hired after January 1, 2006 will automatically enter the new system.

Learning Gains

• Teachers who exceed expectations for student growth as measured by a statewide Colorado test will receive a sustainable 3% raise.
• All teachers will set two student growth objectives with the help of supervisors. Teachers who meet both objectives will receive a 1% raise; those who meet one objective will receive a 1% bonus.
• Teachers at schools identified as distinguished will receive a 2% bonus.

Evaluation

• Teachers found to be unsatisfactory will have their salary increase delayed for a minimum of one year.
  
• Probationary teachers will be evaluated every year in their first three years of service and will receive a 1% raise if they are judged to be satisfactory.
  
• Non-probationary teachers will be evaluated every three years and will receive a raise of 3% if they are deemed satisfactory.

Battle Pay

• Teachers working in assignments identified as hard-to-staff and in schools termed hard-to-serve will receive a 3% bonus.

Credentials

• Teachers with active licenses from the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (MBPTS) will be awarded a salary increase of 9%.
  
• Teachers who complete one Professional Development Unit in their concentration will receive a 2% raise.
  
• Teachers who complete an advanced degree relevant to their assignment will receive a 9% raise.

Mr. Jupp also addresses the idea that teacher motivation makes associating pay with performance in the education profession infeasible...

In fact, Denver teachers have shown surprising open-mindedness about merit pay programs. The Denver Public Schools, with the collaboration of the teacher union, launched a Pay for Performance pilot program in 1999 and, when it ended in 2003, started a more comprehensive Professional Compensation System for Teachers (ProComp). Our independent researchers discovered a surprising amount of support for merit pay by teachers in both programs.

The hallmark of the Pay for Performance pilot was paying teachers $1,500 bonuses for meeting measurable objectives set collaboratively with their principals and based on the academic growth of the students they taught. When asked in the spring of 2003, just as the pilot program was ending, to rate whether setting measurable objectives for bonuses of up to $1,500 had an impact on “cooperation among teachers,” 53.2 percent of the participating teachers said the impact was positive; only 2 percent said the impact was negative.

Could the Denver system work here, or is there something substantially different between Colorado and Rhode Island?